Eclesiastul 3
1 Toate îşi au vremea lor, şi fiecare lucru de supt ceruri îşi are ceasul lui.
2 Naşterea îşi are vremea ei, şi moartea îşi are vremea ei; săditul îşi are vremea lui, şi smulgerea celor sădite îşi are vremea ei.
3 Uciderea îşi are vremea ei, şi tămăduirea îşi are vremea ei; dărâmarea îşi are vremea ei, şi zidirea îşi are vremea ei;
4 plânsul îşi are vremea lui, şi râsul îşi are vremea lui; bocitul îşi are vremea lui, şi jucatul îşi are vremea lui;
5 aruncarea cu pietre îşi are vremea ei, şi strângerea pietrelor îşi are vremea ei; îmbrăţişarea îşi are vremea ei, şi depărtarea de îmbrăţişări îşi are vremea ei;
6 căutarea îşi are vremea ei, şi perderea îşi are vremea ei; păstrarea îşi are vremea ei, şi lepădarea îşi are vremea ei;
7 ruptul îşi are vremea lui, şi cusutul îşi are vremea lui; tăcerea îşi are vremea ei, şi vorbirea îşi are vremea ei;
8 iubitul îşi are vremea lui, şi urâtul îşi are vremea lui; războiul îşi are vremea lui, şi pacea îşi are vremea ei.
9 Ce folos are cel ce munceşte din truda lui?
10 Am văzut la ce îndeletnicire supune Dumnezeu pe fiii oamenilor.
11 Orice lucru El îl face frumos la vremea lui; a pus în inima lor chiar şi gândul veciniciei, măcarcă omul nu poate cuprinde, dela început până la sfârşit, lucrarea pe care a făcut-o Dumnezeu.
12 Am ajuns să cunosc că nu este altă fericire pentru ei decât să se bucure şi să trăiască bine în viaţa lor;
13 dar şi faptul că un om mănâncă şi bea şi duce un trai bun în mijlocul întregei lui munci, este un dar dela Dumnezeu.
14 Am ajuns la cunoştinţa că tot ce face Dumnezeu dăinuieşte în veci, şi la ceeace face El nu mai este nimic de adăugat şi nimic de scăzut, şi că Dumnezeu face aşa pentru ca lumea să se teamă de El.
15 Ce este, a mai fost, şi ce va fi, a mai fost; şi Dumnezeu aduce iarăş înapoi ce a trecut.
16 Am mai văzut supt soare că în locul rânduit pentru judecată domneşte nelegiuirea, şi că în locul rânduit pentru dreptate este răutate.
17 Atunci am zis în inima mea: ,,Dumnezeu va judeca şi pe cel bun şi pe cel rău; căci El a sorocit o vreme pentru orice lucru şi pentru orice faptă.``
18 Am zis în inima mea că acestea se întâmplă numai pentru oameni, ca să-i cerce Dumnezeu, şi ei înşişi să vadă că nu sânt decât nişte dobitoace.
19 Căci soarta omului şi a dobitocului este aceeaş; aceeaş soartă au amândoi; cum moare unul, aşa moare şi celalt, toţi au aceeaş suflare, şi omul nu întrece cu nimic pe dobitoc; căci totul este deşertăciune.
20 Toate merg la un loc; toate au fost făcute din ţărână, şi toate se întorc în ţărână.
21 Cine ştie dacă suflarea omului se suie în sus, şi dacă suflarea dobitocului se pogoară în jos în pământ?
22 Aşa că am văzut că nu este nimic mai bun pentru om decât să se veselească de lucrările lui: aceasta este partea lui. Căci cine-l va face să se bucure de ce va fi după el?
{"verseMap":{"1":[{"id":10032,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ecclesiastes","title_en":"Book of Ecclesiastes","content_ro":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","summary_en":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":50808,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:1","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:1-8<\/strong> <em>For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven:<\/em> Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:1-8<\/strong> <em>For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven:<\/em> Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:1-8 For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven: Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).","summary_en":"3:1-8 For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven: Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78434,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:1","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:1-8<\/strong> <em>For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven:<\/em> Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:1-8<\/strong> <em>For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven:<\/em> Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:1-8 For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven: Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).","summary_en":"3:1-8 For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven: Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106060,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:1","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:1-8<\/strong> <em>For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven:<\/em> Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:1-8<\/strong> <em>For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven:<\/em> Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:1-8 For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven: Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).","summary_en":"3:1-8 For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven: Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133686,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:1","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:1","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:1-8<\/strong> <em>For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven:<\/em> Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:1-8<\/strong> <em>For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven:<\/em> Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:1-8 For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven: Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).","summary_en":"3:1-8 For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven: Wisdom recognizes that everything has its own season—in human activities as in the realm of nature (see 1:3-7). A wise person will determine the appropriate time to pursue any activity (8:5). The opportunity is fleeting (Eph 5:16; Col 4:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"2":[{"id":50809,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:2","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:2-8<\/strong> We have no control over when we are <em>born<\/em> or when we <em>die<\/em> (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • <em>plant and . . . harvest:<\/em> Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to <em>kill<\/em> included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often <em>tear<\/em> their clothes. • There is <em>a time to hate<\/em><em>,<\/em> even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:2-8<\/strong> We have no control over when we are <em>born<\/em> or when we <em>die<\/em> (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • <em>plant and . . . harvest:<\/em> Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to <em>kill<\/em> included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often <em>tear<\/em> their clothes. • There is <em>a time to hate<\/em><em>,<\/em> even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:2-8 We have no control over when we are born or when we die (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • plant and . . . harvest: Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to kill included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often tear their clothes. • There is a time to hate, even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).","summary_en":"3:2-8 We have no control over when we are born or when we die (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • plant and . . . harvest: Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to kill included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often tear their clothes. • There is a time to hate, even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78435,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:2","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:2-8<\/strong> We have no control over when we are <em>born<\/em> or when we <em>die<\/em> (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • <em>plant and . . . harvest:<\/em> Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to <em>kill<\/em> included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often <em>tear<\/em> their clothes. • There is <em>a time to hate<\/em><em>,<\/em> even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:2-8<\/strong> We have no control over when we are <em>born<\/em> or when we <em>die<\/em> (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • <em>plant and . . . harvest:<\/em> Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to <em>kill<\/em> included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often <em>tear<\/em> their clothes. • There is <em>a time to hate<\/em><em>,<\/em> even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:2-8 We have no control over when we are born or when we die (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • plant and . . . harvest: Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to kill included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often tear their clothes. • There is a time to hate, even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).","summary_en":"3:2-8 We have no control over when we are born or when we die (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • plant and . . . harvest: Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to kill included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often tear their clothes. • There is a time to hate, even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106061,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:2","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:2-8<\/strong> We have no control over when we are <em>born<\/em> or when we <em>die<\/em> (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • <em>plant and . . . harvest:<\/em> Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to <em>kill<\/em> included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often <em>tear<\/em> their clothes. • There is <em>a time to hate<\/em><em>,<\/em> even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:2-8<\/strong> We have no control over when we are <em>born<\/em> or when we <em>die<\/em> (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • <em>plant and . . . harvest:<\/em> Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to <em>kill<\/em> included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often <em>tear<\/em> their clothes. • There is <em>a time to hate<\/em><em>,<\/em> even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:2-8 We have no control over when we are born or when we die (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • plant and . . . harvest: Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to kill included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often tear their clothes. • There is a time to hate, even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).","summary_en":"3:2-8 We have no control over when we are born or when we die (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • plant and . . . harvest: Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to kill included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often tear their clothes. • There is a time to hate, even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133687,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:2","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:2","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:2-8<\/strong> We have no control over when we are <em>born<\/em> or when we <em>die<\/em> (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • <em>plant and . . . harvest:<\/em> Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to <em>kill<\/em> included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often <em>tear<\/em> their clothes. • There is <em>a time to hate<\/em><em>,<\/em> even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:2-8<\/strong> We have no control over when we are <em>born<\/em> or when we <em>die<\/em> (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • <em>plant and . . . harvest:<\/em> Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to <em>kill<\/em> included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often <em>tear<\/em> their clothes. • There is <em>a time to hate<\/em><em>,<\/em> even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:2-8 We have no control over when we are born or when we die (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • plant and . . . harvest: Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to kill included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often tear their clothes. • There is a time to hate, even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).","summary_en":"3:2-8 We have no control over when we are born or when we die (8:8), but it is our responsibility to live wisely between those events. • plant and . . . harvest: Wise agricultural decisions must be made in the natural seasons. • In ancient Israel, the times to kill included capital punishment and war. • In times of mourning, people in the Near East would often tear their clothes. • There is a time to hate, even for God (Pss 5:5; 11:5).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"4":[{"id":22631,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Laughter","title_en":"Laughter","content_ro":"<h3>LAUGHTER<\/h3>\n<p>Expression of a variey of emotions. Laughter can express overjoyed happiness when circumstances change for the better, as for the Jews in returning from exile (Ps 126:2). Such joy is sincerely but facilely offered to Job by one of his comforters (Jb 8:21). Laughter can be good-humored and friendly, to encourage others (29:24). There is “a time to cry and a time to laugh” (Eccl 3:4), but the Preacher had his doubts: life is no laughing matter, and sorrow can be a better teacher (2:2; 7:3). Yet it is good to be able not to take certain things seriously. The well-prepared housewife “laughs with no fear of the future” (Prv 31:25). Job is promised that war and famine would be nothing to worry about (Jb 5:22; cf. Hb 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Laughter can be a negative, derisive thing. We can laugh at people and laugh them to scorn. This element comes very much to the fore in the OT. Job and Jeremiah complain of being laughingstocks (Jb 12:4; Jer 20:7). The nation complains that their enemies laugh at their distress (Ps 80:6; cf. 2 Chr 30:10). Sometimes there is every justification. In Psalm 52:6 the righteous are promised the last laugh, at the expense of the wicked unbeliever who thinks that he can leave God out of his life. In Proverbs 1:26, personified Wisdom warns that she will laugh at the calamity of those who refuse to take her advice: it will serve them right. In this sense laughter is ascribed to God three times in the Psalter. He laughs at the nations plotting against his anointed King (Ps 2:4). He laughs at wicked people, knowing they are heading for disaster (37:13). He is invited to laugh at the psalmist’s enemies (59:8). This divine laughter is a way of expressing that the truth will eventually prevail.<\/p>\n<p>Laughter has a special place in the Abraham narratives. It is used in connection with the name of his son Isaac, which means “He laughs” or “May [God] smile [upon him].” Hebrew stories like to bring out the meaning of words, and so the human reaction to the birth of Isaac, the channel of God’s patriarchal promises, is described in terms of laughter. It is theologically important because it tends to be contrasted with faith. In Genesis 17:17 laughter is Abraham’s incredulous response to God’s unrealistic promise of a son, in view of Sarah’s elderliness. In Genesis 18:12 Sarah cannot smother her laughter as she eavesdrops—it seems so absurd that she will become pregnant in her 90s. But finally in Genesis 21:6, when the impossible becomes true, Sarah’s laughter is a mark of God-given joy.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>LAUGHTER<\/h3>\n<p>Expression of a variey of emotions. Laughter can express overjoyed happiness when circumstances change for the better, as for the Jews in returning from exile (Ps 126:2). Such joy is sincerely but facilely offered to Job by one of his comforters (Jb 8:21). Laughter can be good-humored and friendly, to encourage others (29:24). There is “a time to cry and a time to laugh” (Eccl 3:4), but the Preacher had his doubts: life is no laughing matter, and sorrow can be a better teacher (2:2; 7:3). Yet it is good to be able not to take certain things seriously. The well-prepared housewife “laughs with no fear of the future” (Prv 31:25). Job is promised that war and famine would be nothing to worry about (Jb 5:22; cf. Hb 1:9).<\/p>\n<p>Laughter can be a negative, derisive thing. We can laugh at people and laugh them to scorn. This element comes very much to the fore in the OT. Job and Jeremiah complain of being laughingstocks (Jb 12:4; Jer 20:7). The nation complains that their enemies laugh at their distress (Ps 80:6; cf. 2 Chr 30:10). Sometimes there is every justification. In Psalm 52:6 the righteous are promised the last laugh, at the expense of the wicked unbeliever who thinks that he can leave God out of his life. In Proverbs 1:26, personified Wisdom warns that she will laugh at the calamity of those who refuse to take her advice: it will serve them right. In this sense laughter is ascribed to God three times in the Psalter. He laughs at the nations plotting against his anointed King (Ps 2:4). He laughs at wicked people, knowing they are heading for disaster (37:13). He is invited to laugh at the psalmist’s enemies (59:8). This divine laughter is a way of expressing that the truth will eventually prevail.<\/p>\n<p>Laughter has a special place in the Abraham narratives. It is used in connection with the name of his son Isaac, which means “He laughs” or “May [God] smile [upon him].” Hebrew stories like to bring out the meaning of words, and so the human reaction to the birth of Isaac, the channel of God’s patriarchal promises, is described in terms of laughter. It is theologically important because it tends to be contrasted with faith. In Genesis 17:17 laughter is Abraham’s incredulous response to God’s unrealistic promise of a son, in view of Sarah’s elderliness. In Genesis 18:12 Sarah cannot smother her laughter as she eavesdrops—it seems so absurd that she will become pregnant in her 90s. But finally in Genesis 21:6, when the impossible becomes true, Sarah’s laughter is a mark of God-given joy.<\/p>","summary_ro":"LAUGHTER Expression of a variey of emotions. Laughter can express overjoyed happiness when circumstances change for the better, as for the Jews in returning from exile (Ps 126:2). Such joy is sincerely but facilely offered to Job by one of his comforters (Jb 8:21). Laughter can be good-humored and friendly, to encourage others (29:24). There is “a time to cry and a time to laugh” (Eccl 3:4), but the Preacher had his doubts: life is no laughing matter, and sorrow can be a better teacher (2:2; ...","summary_en":"LAUGHTER Expression of a variey of emotions. Laughter can express overjoyed happiness when circumstances change for the better, as for the Jews in returning from exile (Ps 126:2). Such joy is sincerely but facilely offered to Job by one of his comforters (Jb 8:21). Laughter can be good-humored and friendly, to encourage others (29:24). There is “a time to cry and a time to laugh” (Eccl 3:4), but the Preacher had his doubts: life is no laughing matter, and sorrow can be a better teacher (2:2; ...","source":"Articles\/L.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"9":[{"id":50810,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:9","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:9-14<\/strong> Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:9-14<\/strong> Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:9-14 Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.","summary_en":"3:9-14 Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":50811,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:9","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:9<\/strong> <em>get for . . . hard work?<\/em> See 3:12-13.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:9<\/strong> <em>get for . . . hard work?<\/em> See 3:12-13.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:9 get for . . . hard work? See 3:12-13.","summary_en":"3:9 get for . . . hard work? See 3:12-13.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78436,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:9","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:9-14<\/strong> Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:9-14<\/strong> Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:9-14 Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.","summary_en":"3:9-14 Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78437,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:9","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:9<\/strong> <em>get for . . . hard work?<\/em> See 3:12-13.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:9<\/strong> <em>get for . . . hard work?<\/em> See 3:12-13.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:9 get for . . . hard work? See 3:12-13.","summary_en":"3:9 get for . . . hard work? See 3:12-13.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106062,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:9","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:9-14<\/strong> Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:9-14<\/strong> Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:9-14 Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.","summary_en":"3:9-14 Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106063,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:9","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:9<\/strong> <em>get for . . . hard work?<\/em> See 3:12-13.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:9<\/strong> <em>get for . . . hard work?<\/em> See 3:12-13.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:9 get for . . . hard work? See 3:12-13.","summary_en":"3:9 get for . . . hard work? See 3:12-13.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133688,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:9","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:9-14<\/strong> Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:9-14<\/strong> Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:9-14 Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.","summary_en":"3:9-14 Even though every activity has an appropriate occasion (3:1-8), only God can truly know what that occasion is (3:9-11). Mortals must be content with uncertainty and trust the sovereign God who gives enjoyment to those who work wisely and righteously.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133689,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:9","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:9","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:9<\/strong> <em>get for . . . hard work?<\/em> See 3:12-13.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:9<\/strong> <em>get for . . . hard work?<\/em> See 3:12-13.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:9 get for . . . hard work? See 3:12-13.","summary_en":"3:9 get for . . . hard work? See 3:12-13.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"10":[{"id":10036,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ecclesiastes","title_en":"Book of Ecclesiastes","content_ro":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","summary_en":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":50812,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:10","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:10<\/strong> <em>the burden God has placed on us all:<\/em> God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:10<\/strong> <em>the burden God has placed on us all:<\/em> God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:10 the burden God has placed on us all: God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).","summary_en":"3:10 the burden God has placed on us all: God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78438,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:10","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:10<\/strong> <em>the burden God has placed on us all:<\/em> God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:10<\/strong> <em>the burden God has placed on us all:<\/em> God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:10 the burden God has placed on us all: God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).","summary_en":"3:10 the burden God has placed on us all: God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106064,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:10","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:10<\/strong> <em>the burden God has placed on us all:<\/em> God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:10<\/strong> <em>the burden God has placed on us all:<\/em> God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:10 the burden God has placed on us all: God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).","summary_en":"3:10 the burden God has placed on us all: God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133690,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:10","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:10","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:10<\/strong> <em>the burden God has placed on us all:<\/em> God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:10<\/strong> <em>the burden God has placed on us all:<\/em> God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:10 the burden God has placed on us all: God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).","summary_en":"3:10 the burden God has placed on us all: God intensified the severity of our labor following humankind’s rebellion against him (Gen 3:17-19). This burden is not so great that we cannot enjoy our work and its fruits (Eccl 3:11-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"11":[{"id":10051,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ecclesiastes","title_en":"Book of Ecclesiastes","content_ro":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","summary_en":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":50813,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:11","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:11<\/strong> <em>God has made everything beautiful for its own time:<\/em> We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times <em>people cannot see<\/em><em>:<\/em> God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has <em>planted eternity<\/em><em>,<\/em> an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:11<\/strong> <em>God has made everything beautiful for its own time:<\/em> We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times <em>people cannot see<\/em><em>:<\/em> God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has <em>planted eternity<\/em><em>,<\/em> an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:11 God has made everything beautiful for its own time: We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times people cannot see: God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has planted eternity, an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.","summary_en":"3:11 God has made everything beautiful for its own time: We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times people cannot see: God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has planted eternity, an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78439,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:11","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:11<\/strong> <em>God has made everything beautiful for its own time:<\/em> We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times <em>people cannot see<\/em><em>:<\/em> God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has <em>planted eternity<\/em><em>,<\/em> an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:11<\/strong> <em>God has made everything beautiful for its own time:<\/em> We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times <em>people cannot see<\/em><em>:<\/em> God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has <em>planted eternity<\/em><em>,<\/em> an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:11 God has made everything beautiful for its own time: We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times people cannot see: God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has planted eternity, an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.","summary_en":"3:11 God has made everything beautiful for its own time: We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times people cannot see: God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has planted eternity, an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106065,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:11","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:11<\/strong> <em>God has made everything beautiful for its own time:<\/em> We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times <em>people cannot see<\/em><em>:<\/em> God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has <em>planted eternity<\/em><em>,<\/em> an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:11<\/strong> <em>God has made everything beautiful for its own time:<\/em> We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times <em>people cannot see<\/em><em>:<\/em> God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has <em>planted eternity<\/em><em>,<\/em> an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:11 God has made everything beautiful for its own time: We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times people cannot see: God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has planted eternity, an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.","summary_en":"3:11 God has made everything beautiful for its own time: We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times people cannot see: God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has planted eternity, an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133691,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:11","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:11","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:11<\/strong> <em>God has made everything beautiful for its own time:<\/em> We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times <em>people cannot see<\/em><em>:<\/em> God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has <em>planted eternity<\/em><em>,<\/em> an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:11<\/strong> <em>God has made everything beautiful for its own time:<\/em> We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times <em>people cannot see<\/em><em>:<\/em> God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has <em>planted eternity<\/em><em>,<\/em> an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:11 God has made everything beautiful for its own time: We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times people cannot see: God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has planted eternity, an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.","summary_en":"3:11 God has made everything beautiful for its own time: We can sometimes see this beauty in our work and in the world, but many times people cannot see: God reserves for himself the understanding of how everything fits together (cp. Rom 8:22-28). • God has planted eternity, an awareness of the infinite, within each of us—enough for us to be in awe of him who is infinite and eternal, and enough to hope for eternal life after death.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"12":[{"id":50814,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:12","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:12-13<\/strong> <em>be happy and enjoy:<\/em> Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:12-13<\/strong> <em>be happy and enjoy:<\/em> Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:12-13 be happy and enjoy: Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.","summary_en":"3:12-13 be happy and enjoy: Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78440,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:12","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:12-13<\/strong> <em>be happy and enjoy:<\/em> Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:12-13<\/strong> <em>be happy and enjoy:<\/em> Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:12-13 be happy and enjoy: Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.","summary_en":"3:12-13 be happy and enjoy: Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106066,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:12","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:12-13<\/strong> <em>be happy and enjoy:<\/em> Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:12-13<\/strong> <em>be happy and enjoy:<\/em> Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:12-13 be happy and enjoy: Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.","summary_en":"3:12-13 be happy and enjoy: Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133692,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:12","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:12","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:12-13<\/strong> <em>be happy and enjoy:<\/em> Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:12-13<\/strong> <em>be happy and enjoy:<\/em> Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:12-13 be happy and enjoy: Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.","summary_en":"3:12-13 be happy and enjoy: Though life and work can be burdensome, the Teacher’s conclusion (repeated from 2:24) can still hold true.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63697,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","title_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","content_ro":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","summary_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91323,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","title_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","content_ro":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","summary_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118949,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","title_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","content_ro":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","summary_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146575,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","title_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","content_ro":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","summary_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"14":[{"id":50815,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:14","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:14<\/strong> Knowing that <em>whatever God does is final<\/em> is a reason to <em>fear him<\/em>—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:14<\/strong> Knowing that <em>whatever God does is final<\/em> is a reason to <em>fear him<\/em>—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:14 Knowing that whatever God does is final is a reason to fear him—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.","summary_en":"3:14 Knowing that whatever God does is final is a reason to fear him—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78441,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:14","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:14<\/strong> Knowing that <em>whatever God does is final<\/em> is a reason to <em>fear him<\/em>—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:14<\/strong> Knowing that <em>whatever God does is final<\/em> is a reason to <em>fear him<\/em>—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:14 Knowing that whatever God does is final is a reason to fear him—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.","summary_en":"3:14 Knowing that whatever God does is final is a reason to fear him—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106067,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:14","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:14<\/strong> Knowing that <em>whatever God does is final<\/em> is a reason to <em>fear him<\/em>—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:14<\/strong> Knowing that <em>whatever God does is final<\/em> is a reason to <em>fear him<\/em>—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:14 Knowing that whatever God does is final is a reason to fear him—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.","summary_en":"3:14 Knowing that whatever God does is final is a reason to fear him—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133693,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:14","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:14","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:14<\/strong> Knowing that <em>whatever God does is final<\/em> is a reason to <em>fear him<\/em>—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:14<\/strong> Knowing that <em>whatever God does is final<\/em> is a reason to <em>fear him<\/em>—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:14 Knowing that whatever God does is final is a reason to fear him—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.","summary_en":"3:14 Knowing that whatever God does is final is a reason to fear him—to trust and revere God and respect all that he does.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":62012,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Trusting in Human Strength","title_en":"Trusting in Human Strength","content_ro":"<h3>Trusting in Human Strength<\/h3>\n<p>God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the people of Israel demonstrated a lack of trust in the Lord, instead opting to trust in human strength.<\/p>\n<p>On one occasion, Asa, king of Judah, sought help from the king of Aram—a perennial enemy of God’s people—giving him the treasures of the Temple and palace so he would attack Baasha, king of Israel (2 Chr 16:1-6). The prophet Hanani chastised Asa, seeing in Aram a human foe who would continue to be a nemesis to the kingdom of Judah. Previous battles demonstrated that God was the only ally Asa needed (16:8).<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s reliance on the king of Aram revealed a much deeper spiritual problem. Asa forgot that “the eyes of the <span>Lord<\/span> search the whole earth” (16:9; see also Zech 4:10). So when Hanani confronted Asa with the error of his ways, Asa summarily threw the prophet into confinement, and the angry king arbitrarily inflicted cruelties on the people (2 Chr 16:10).<\/p>\n<p>Asa provides a sad example of the human propensity to rely on one’s own tangible resources (see Prov 11:7; Isa 31:1; Jer 17:5-6) and to become angry when corrected. Even those who experience the power of the Lord in a very tangible fashion often have this leaning; this was quite true of the generation of Israelites who had been rescued by God from slavery in Egypt. It is much better to rely on the Lord and welcome his direction (cp. Pss 33:18; 37:7; Isa 50:10; Jer 17:7-8; Acts 13:43). Life is a long lesson in trusting God; we might begin by doing what is good and right (2 Chr 14:1-6), but our legacy is not settled until the last deed is done (see Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5). Faithfulness to the Kingdom of God must not be compromised by personal ambitions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:4; 2 Kgs 6:15-18; 2 Chr 16:1-10; 32:7-8; Pss 20:6-8; 37:3-7; 60:11-12; Prov 11:7-8; 18:10-12; Eccl 3:14; Isa 31:1-5; Jer 17:5-8; Matt 10:26-31; Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5; Rev 2:8-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Trusting in Human Strength<\/h3>\n<p>God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the people of Israel demonstrated a lack of trust in the Lord, instead opting to trust in human strength.<\/p>\n<p>On one occasion, Asa, king of Judah, sought help from the king of Aram—a perennial enemy of God’s people—giving him the treasures of the Temple and palace so he would attack Baasha, king of Israel (2 Chr 16:1-6). The prophet Hanani chastised Asa, seeing in Aram a human foe who would continue to be a nemesis to the kingdom of Judah. Previous battles demonstrated that God was the only ally Asa needed (16:8).<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s reliance on the king of Aram revealed a much deeper spiritual problem. Asa forgot that “the eyes of the <span>Lord<\/span> search the whole earth” (16:9; see also Zech 4:10). So when Hanani confronted Asa with the error of his ways, Asa summarily threw the prophet into confinement, and the angry king arbitrarily inflicted cruelties on the people (2 Chr 16:10).<\/p>\n<p>Asa provides a sad example of the human propensity to rely on one’s own tangible resources (see Prov 11:7; Isa 31:1; Jer 17:5-6) and to become angry when corrected. Even those who experience the power of the Lord in a very tangible fashion often have this leaning; this was quite true of the generation of Israelites who had been rescued by God from slavery in Egypt. It is much better to rely on the Lord and welcome his direction (cp. Pss 33:18; 37:7; Isa 50:10; Jer 17:7-8; Acts 13:43). Life is a long lesson in trusting God; we might begin by doing what is good and right (2 Chr 14:1-6), but our legacy is not settled until the last deed is done (see Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5). Faithfulness to the Kingdom of God must not be compromised by personal ambitions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:4; 2 Kgs 6:15-18; 2 Chr 16:1-10; 32:7-8; Pss 20:6-8; 37:3-7; 60:11-12; Prov 11:7-8; 18:10-12; Eccl 3:14; Isa 31:1-5; Jer 17:5-8; Matt 10:26-31; Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5; Rev 2:8-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Trusting in Human Strength God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the pe...","summary_en":"Trusting in Human Strength God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the pe...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":89638,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Trusting in Human Strength","title_en":"Trusting in Human Strength","content_ro":"<h3>Trusting in Human Strength<\/h3>\n<p>God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the people of Israel demonstrated a lack of trust in the Lord, instead opting to trust in human strength.<\/p>\n<p>On one occasion, Asa, king of Judah, sought help from the king of Aram—a perennial enemy of God’s people—giving him the treasures of the Temple and palace so he would attack Baasha, king of Israel (2 Chr 16:1-6). The prophet Hanani chastised Asa, seeing in Aram a human foe who would continue to be a nemesis to the kingdom of Judah. Previous battles demonstrated that God was the only ally Asa needed (16:8).<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s reliance on the king of Aram revealed a much deeper spiritual problem. Asa forgot that “the eyes of the <span>Lord<\/span> search the whole earth” (16:9; see also Zech 4:10). So when Hanani confronted Asa with the error of his ways, Asa summarily threw the prophet into confinement, and the angry king arbitrarily inflicted cruelties on the people (2 Chr 16:10).<\/p>\n<p>Asa provides a sad example of the human propensity to rely on one’s own tangible resources (see Prov 11:7; Isa 31:1; Jer 17:5-6) and to become angry when corrected. Even those who experience the power of the Lord in a very tangible fashion often have this leaning; this was quite true of the generation of Israelites who had been rescued by God from slavery in Egypt. It is much better to rely on the Lord and welcome his direction (cp. Pss 33:18; 37:7; Isa 50:10; Jer 17:7-8; Acts 13:43). Life is a long lesson in trusting God; we might begin by doing what is good and right (2 Chr 14:1-6), but our legacy is not settled until the last deed is done (see Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5). Faithfulness to the Kingdom of God must not be compromised by personal ambitions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:4; 2 Kgs 6:15-18; 2 Chr 16:1-10; 32:7-8; Pss 20:6-8; 37:3-7; 60:11-12; Prov 11:7-8; 18:10-12; Eccl 3:14; Isa 31:1-5; Jer 17:5-8; Matt 10:26-31; Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5; Rev 2:8-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Trusting in Human Strength<\/h3>\n<p>God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the people of Israel demonstrated a lack of trust in the Lord, instead opting to trust in human strength.<\/p>\n<p>On one occasion, Asa, king of Judah, sought help from the king of Aram—a perennial enemy of God’s people—giving him the treasures of the Temple and palace so he would attack Baasha, king of Israel (2 Chr 16:1-6). The prophet Hanani chastised Asa, seeing in Aram a human foe who would continue to be a nemesis to the kingdom of Judah. Previous battles demonstrated that God was the only ally Asa needed (16:8).<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s reliance on the king of Aram revealed a much deeper spiritual problem. Asa forgot that “the eyes of the <span>Lord<\/span> search the whole earth” (16:9; see also Zech 4:10). So when Hanani confronted Asa with the error of his ways, Asa summarily threw the prophet into confinement, and the angry king arbitrarily inflicted cruelties on the people (2 Chr 16:10).<\/p>\n<p>Asa provides a sad example of the human propensity to rely on one’s own tangible resources (see Prov 11:7; Isa 31:1; Jer 17:5-6) and to become angry when corrected. Even those who experience the power of the Lord in a very tangible fashion often have this leaning; this was quite true of the generation of Israelites who had been rescued by God from slavery in Egypt. It is much better to rely on the Lord and welcome his direction (cp. Pss 33:18; 37:7; Isa 50:10; Jer 17:7-8; Acts 13:43). Life is a long lesson in trusting God; we might begin by doing what is good and right (2 Chr 14:1-6), but our legacy is not settled until the last deed is done (see Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5). Faithfulness to the Kingdom of God must not be compromised by personal ambitions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:4; 2 Kgs 6:15-18; 2 Chr 16:1-10; 32:7-8; Pss 20:6-8; 37:3-7; 60:11-12; Prov 11:7-8; 18:10-12; Eccl 3:14; Isa 31:1-5; Jer 17:5-8; Matt 10:26-31; Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5; Rev 2:8-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Trusting in Human Strength God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the pe...","summary_en":"Trusting in Human Strength God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the pe...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":117264,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Trusting in Human Strength","title_en":"Trusting in Human Strength","content_ro":"<h3>Trusting in Human Strength<\/h3>\n<p>God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the people of Israel demonstrated a lack of trust in the Lord, instead opting to trust in human strength.<\/p>\n<p>On one occasion, Asa, king of Judah, sought help from the king of Aram—a perennial enemy of God’s people—giving him the treasures of the Temple and palace so he would attack Baasha, king of Israel (2 Chr 16:1-6). The prophet Hanani chastised Asa, seeing in Aram a human foe who would continue to be a nemesis to the kingdom of Judah. Previous battles demonstrated that God was the only ally Asa needed (16:8).<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s reliance on the king of Aram revealed a much deeper spiritual problem. Asa forgot that “the eyes of the <span>Lord<\/span> search the whole earth” (16:9; see also Zech 4:10). So when Hanani confronted Asa with the error of his ways, Asa summarily threw the prophet into confinement, and the angry king arbitrarily inflicted cruelties on the people (2 Chr 16:10).<\/p>\n<p>Asa provides a sad example of the human propensity to rely on one’s own tangible resources (see Prov 11:7; Isa 31:1; Jer 17:5-6) and to become angry when corrected. Even those who experience the power of the Lord in a very tangible fashion often have this leaning; this was quite true of the generation of Israelites who had been rescued by God from slavery in Egypt. It is much better to rely on the Lord and welcome his direction (cp. Pss 33:18; 37:7; Isa 50:10; Jer 17:7-8; Acts 13:43). Life is a long lesson in trusting God; we might begin by doing what is good and right (2 Chr 14:1-6), but our legacy is not settled until the last deed is done (see Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5). Faithfulness to the Kingdom of God must not be compromised by personal ambitions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:4; 2 Kgs 6:15-18; 2 Chr 16:1-10; 32:7-8; Pss 20:6-8; 37:3-7; 60:11-12; Prov 11:7-8; 18:10-12; Eccl 3:14; Isa 31:1-5; Jer 17:5-8; Matt 10:26-31; Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5; Rev 2:8-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Trusting in Human Strength<\/h3>\n<p>God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the people of Israel demonstrated a lack of trust in the Lord, instead opting to trust in human strength.<\/p>\n<p>On one occasion, Asa, king of Judah, sought help from the king of Aram—a perennial enemy of God’s people—giving him the treasures of the Temple and palace so he would attack Baasha, king of Israel (2 Chr 16:1-6). The prophet Hanani chastised Asa, seeing in Aram a human foe who would continue to be a nemesis to the kingdom of Judah. Previous battles demonstrated that God was the only ally Asa needed (16:8).<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s reliance on the king of Aram revealed a much deeper spiritual problem. Asa forgot that “the eyes of the <span>Lord<\/span> search the whole earth” (16:9; see also Zech 4:10). So when Hanani confronted Asa with the error of his ways, Asa summarily threw the prophet into confinement, and the angry king arbitrarily inflicted cruelties on the people (2 Chr 16:10).<\/p>\n<p>Asa provides a sad example of the human propensity to rely on one’s own tangible resources (see Prov 11:7; Isa 31:1; Jer 17:5-6) and to become angry when corrected. Even those who experience the power of the Lord in a very tangible fashion often have this leaning; this was quite true of the generation of Israelites who had been rescued by God from slavery in Egypt. It is much better to rely on the Lord and welcome his direction (cp. Pss 33:18; 37:7; Isa 50:10; Jer 17:7-8; Acts 13:43). Life is a long lesson in trusting God; we might begin by doing what is good and right (2 Chr 14:1-6), but our legacy is not settled until the last deed is done (see Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5). Faithfulness to the Kingdom of God must not be compromised by personal ambitions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:4; 2 Kgs 6:15-18; 2 Chr 16:1-10; 32:7-8; Pss 20:6-8; 37:3-7; 60:11-12; Prov 11:7-8; 18:10-12; Eccl 3:14; Isa 31:1-5; Jer 17:5-8; Matt 10:26-31; Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5; Rev 2:8-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Trusting in Human Strength God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the pe...","summary_en":"Trusting in Human Strength God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the pe...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":144890,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Trusting in Human Strength","title_en":"Trusting in Human Strength","content_ro":"<h3>Trusting in Human Strength<\/h3>\n<p>God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the people of Israel demonstrated a lack of trust in the Lord, instead opting to trust in human strength.<\/p>\n<p>On one occasion, Asa, king of Judah, sought help from the king of Aram—a perennial enemy of God’s people—giving him the treasures of the Temple and palace so he would attack Baasha, king of Israel (2 Chr 16:1-6). The prophet Hanani chastised Asa, seeing in Aram a human foe who would continue to be a nemesis to the kingdom of Judah. Previous battles demonstrated that God was the only ally Asa needed (16:8).<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s reliance on the king of Aram revealed a much deeper spiritual problem. Asa forgot that “the eyes of the <span>Lord<\/span> search the whole earth” (16:9; see also Zech 4:10). So when Hanani confronted Asa with the error of his ways, Asa summarily threw the prophet into confinement, and the angry king arbitrarily inflicted cruelties on the people (2 Chr 16:10).<\/p>\n<p>Asa provides a sad example of the human propensity to rely on one’s own tangible resources (see Prov 11:7; Isa 31:1; Jer 17:5-6) and to become angry when corrected. Even those who experience the power of the Lord in a very tangible fashion often have this leaning; this was quite true of the generation of Israelites who had been rescued by God from slavery in Egypt. It is much better to rely on the Lord and welcome his direction (cp. Pss 33:18; 37:7; Isa 50:10; Jer 17:7-8; Acts 13:43). Life is a long lesson in trusting God; we might begin by doing what is good and right (2 Chr 14:1-6), but our legacy is not settled until the last deed is done (see Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5). Faithfulness to the Kingdom of God must not be compromised by personal ambitions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:4; 2 Kgs 6:15-18; 2 Chr 16:1-10; 32:7-8; Pss 20:6-8; 37:3-7; 60:11-12; Prov 11:7-8; 18:10-12; Eccl 3:14; Isa 31:1-5; Jer 17:5-8; Matt 10:26-31; Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5; Rev 2:8-11<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Trusting in Human Strength<\/h3>\n<p>God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the people of Israel demonstrated a lack of trust in the Lord, instead opting to trust in human strength.<\/p>\n<p>On one occasion, Asa, king of Judah, sought help from the king of Aram—a perennial enemy of God’s people—giving him the treasures of the Temple and palace so he would attack Baasha, king of Israel (2 Chr 16:1-6). The prophet Hanani chastised Asa, seeing in Aram a human foe who would continue to be a nemesis to the kingdom of Judah. Previous battles demonstrated that God was the only ally Asa needed (16:8).<\/p>\n<p>Asa’s reliance on the king of Aram revealed a much deeper spiritual problem. Asa forgot that “the eyes of the <span>Lord<\/span> search the whole earth” (16:9; see also Zech 4:10). So when Hanani confronted Asa with the error of his ways, Asa summarily threw the prophet into confinement, and the angry king arbitrarily inflicted cruelties on the people (2 Chr 16:10).<\/p>\n<p>Asa provides a sad example of the human propensity to rely on one’s own tangible resources (see Prov 11:7; Isa 31:1; Jer 17:5-6) and to become angry when corrected. Even those who experience the power of the Lord in a very tangible fashion often have this leaning; this was quite true of the generation of Israelites who had been rescued by God from slavery in Egypt. It is much better to rely on the Lord and welcome his direction (cp. Pss 33:18; 37:7; Isa 50:10; Jer 17:7-8; Acts 13:43). Life is a long lesson in trusting God; we might begin by doing what is good and right (2 Chr 14:1-6), but our legacy is not settled until the last deed is done (see Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5). Faithfulness to the Kingdom of God must not be compromised by personal ambitions.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Deut 13:4; 2 Kgs 6:15-18; 2 Chr 16:1-10; 32:7-8; Pss 20:6-8; 37:3-7; 60:11-12; Prov 11:7-8; 18:10-12; Eccl 3:14; Isa 31:1-5; Jer 17:5-8; Matt 10:26-31; Rom 2:6-11; 1 Cor 4:1-5; Rev 2:8-11<\/p>","summary_ro":"Trusting in Human Strength God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the pe...","summary_en":"Trusting in Human Strength God had repeatedly displayed his power to his people throughout their history. He took a barren elderly couple and made them the progenitors of a great nation. He rescued this nation from the clutches of the powerful tyrant, Egypt. He performed numerous miracles in preserving them in the wilderness. And he had secured victory over their enemies many times during the conquest, the period of the judges, and the monarchical period. Yet, throughout their history, the pe...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"15":[{"id":50816,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:15","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:15<\/strong> <em>The same things happen over and over again:<\/em> The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:15<\/strong> <em>The same things happen over and over again:<\/em> The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:15 The same things happen over and over again: The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.","summary_en":"3:15 The same things happen over and over again: The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78442,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:15","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:15<\/strong> <em>The same things happen over and over again:<\/em> The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:15<\/strong> <em>The same things happen over and over again:<\/em> The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:15 The same things happen over and over again: The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.","summary_en":"3:15 The same things happen over and over again: The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106068,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:15","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:15<\/strong> <em>The same things happen over and over again:<\/em> The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:15<\/strong> <em>The same things happen over and over again:<\/em> The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:15 The same things happen over and over again: The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.","summary_en":"3:15 The same things happen over and over again: The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133694,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:15","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:15","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:15<\/strong> <em>The same things happen over and over again:<\/em> The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:15<\/strong> <em>The same things happen over and over again:<\/em> The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:15 The same things happen over and over again: The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.","summary_en":"3:15 The same things happen over and over again: The repetitiveness of history (1:9-10) is part of God’s sovereign plan.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"16":[{"id":10040,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ecclesiastes","title_en":"Book of Ecclesiastes","content_ro":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","summary_en":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":50817,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:16–5:7<\/strong> This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:16–5:7<\/strong> This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16–5:7 This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.","summary_en":"3:16–5:7 This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":50818,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:16<\/strong> <em>courtroom<\/em> (literally <em>the place of justice<\/em>): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:16<\/strong> <em>courtroom<\/em> (literally <em>the place of justice<\/em>): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16 courtroom (literally the place of justice): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).","summary_en":"3:16 courtroom (literally the place of justice): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78443,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:16–5:7<\/strong> This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:16–5:7<\/strong> This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16–5:7 This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.","summary_en":"3:16–5:7 This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78444,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:16<\/strong> <em>courtroom<\/em> (literally <em>the place of justice<\/em>): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:16<\/strong> <em>courtroom<\/em> (literally <em>the place of justice<\/em>): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16 courtroom (literally the place of justice): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).","summary_en":"3:16 courtroom (literally the place of justice): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106069,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:16–5:7<\/strong> This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:16–5:7<\/strong> This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16–5:7 This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.","summary_en":"3:16–5:7 This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106070,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:16<\/strong> <em>courtroom<\/em> (literally <em>the place of justice<\/em>): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:16<\/strong> <em>courtroom<\/em> (literally <em>the place of justice<\/em>): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16 courtroom (literally the place of justice): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).","summary_en":"3:16 courtroom (literally the place of justice): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133695,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:16–5:7<\/strong> This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:16–5:7<\/strong> This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16–5:7 This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.","summary_en":"3:16–5:7 This section comments on a variety of topics, including justice, humans and animals, oppression, moderation, companionship, politics, and worship.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133696,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:16","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:16","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:16<\/strong> <em>courtroom<\/em> (literally <em>the place of justice<\/em>): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:16<\/strong> <em>courtroom<\/em> (literally <em>the place of justice<\/em>): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:16 courtroom (literally the place of justice): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).","summary_en":"3:16 courtroom (literally the place of justice): In Israel, local court proceedings were held at the city gates, where the city’s elders sat to hear and adjudicate legal matters (e.g., see Ruth 4:1-12).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"17":[{"id":50819,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:17","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:17<\/strong> <em>In due season God will judge:<\/em> Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:17<\/strong> <em>In due season God will judge:<\/em> Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:17 In due season God will judge: Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).","summary_en":"3:17 In due season God will judge: Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78445,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:17","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:17<\/strong> <em>In due season God will judge:<\/em> Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:17<\/strong> <em>In due season God will judge:<\/em> Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:17 In due season God will judge: Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).","summary_en":"3:17 In due season God will judge: Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106071,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:17","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:17<\/strong> <em>In due season God will judge:<\/em> Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:17<\/strong> <em>In due season God will judge:<\/em> Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:17 In due season God will judge: Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).","summary_en":"3:17 In due season God will judge: Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133697,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:17","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:17","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:17<\/strong> <em>In due season God will judge:<\/em> Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:17<\/strong> <em>In due season God will judge:<\/em> Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:17 In due season God will judge: Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).","summary_en":"3:17 In due season God will judge: Human injustices (3:16) are temporary and will be righted by God’s justice. The narrator repeats this point to close the entire book (12:14).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"18":[{"id":10042,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ecclesiastes","title_en":"Book of Ecclesiastes","content_ro":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","summary_en":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"19":[{"id":9037,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Death","title_en":"Death","content_ro":"<h3>DEATH<\/h3>\n<p>Cessation of life (physical death) or separation from God (spiritual death).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentView\">Old Testament View<\/p>\n<p>In the OT death was accepted as the natural end of life. The goal of an Israelite was to live a long and full life, produce many descendants, and die in peace with the children and grandchildren gathered about. The OT contains many protests against an early death (e.g., Hezekiah’s, 2 Kgs 20:1-11). An early death might appear to be the result of God’s judgment; hence, Job saw the need to vindicate his character prior to death (Jb 19:25-26). Only in Ecclesiastes 3:19-20 is outright pessimism expressed in the face of death—and that book probably shows considerable non-Hebraic influence.<\/p>\n<p>Death, although a natural ending to life, was never viewed as pleasant. Death cut one off from human community as well as from the presence and service of God. God may offer comfort in the face of death (Ps 73:23-28), but he is rarely portrayed as present with the dead, and that only in later biblical literature (Ps 139:8). For that reason, death was never viewed as the threshold to a better life.<\/p>\n<p>The relationship of sin to death is seen in the death penalty in the law of Moses. A serious offender was put to death. The punitive phrase “he shall be cut off” implied that although the nation went on living, the criminal was separated from it by death. The Israelites were warned that to disobey God’s commandments could bring premature death as a consequence of breaking fellowship with God (Dt 30:15-20; Jer 21:8; Ez 18:21-32).<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, as Jewish ideas of afterlife and resurrection developed more explicitly, so too did Jewish thinking about death. Death itself, not just a premature death, came to be seen as an evil result of sin (2 Esd 3:7; Ecclus 25:24). Sometimes all death is depicted as the result of the “first sin” (Adam and Eve’s disobedience). In other references, everyone dies as a result of his or her own sin. The first clear indication in Scripture of a resurrection of the dead and a final judgment or punishment occurs in the book of Daniel (Dn 12:2), one of the last OT books to be written. That teaching is echoed throughout the intertestamental period (2 Esd 7:31-44). During that time, it was believed that the soul survived death either in some immortal form (Wisd of Sol 3:4; 4:1; 4 Macc 16:13; 17:12) or awaiting the resurrection (1 Enoch 102). Some of those extrabiblical writings incorporated Greek ideas that the body was a burden to be gotten rid of—a notion foreign to Hebrew thought.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of resurrection and a life redeemed from death, however, set the stage for the NT revelation focusing on Christ’s resurrection and his conquest of death.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentView\">New Testament View<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, death is seen more as a theological problem than as a personal event. Death goes beyond the simple ending of physical life, which the authors accept almost without difficulty. Death is seen as affecting every part of a person’s life. God alone is immortal, the source of all life in the world (Rom 4:17; 1 Tm 6:16). Only as human beings are properly related to God’s life can they live. But it has been unnatural for people to be in personal communion with the divine source of life since sin was introduced into the world (Rom 5:12, 17-18; 1 Cor 15:22). When Adam separated himself from God, that separation brought death. Each human being has followed in Adam’s footsteps (Rom 3:23; 5:12), bringing death for everyone as the absolutely necessary result (Rom 6:23; Heb 9:27). Death, then, is not merely something that happens to people at the end of their lives; it is also the living out of their lives apart from fellowship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The extent of death’s domination is vast. It affects every aspect of culture. All of human life is lived under the shadow of the fear of death (Rom 8:15; Heb 2:15). Death reigns over all that is “of the flesh” (Rom 8:6). Anyone not living in relationship to Christ lives in a state of death (Jn 3:16-18; 1 Jn 5:12). The devil, who rules the world, is the lord of death (Heb 2:14). Death is sometimes personified as a demonic power at large in the world but finally brought to bay by Christ himself, the only one who could master it (1 Cor 15:26-27; Rv 6:8; 20:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Christ died, was buried, and rose again on the third day (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:3-4; 1 Thes 4:14). Through that historic event, the power of death was broken. The NT in various ways expresses Christ’s subjection to death in payment for sin. He became obedient to death (Phil 2:8); he died as a sacrifice for the sins of all (1 Cor 5:7; 2 Cor 5:15); and he descended into hades, the place of the dead (1 Pt 3:18-19). The major point of all such passages is that he did not remain dead but defeated the devil, took the power (keys) of death, and ascended in victory (Heb 2:14-15; Rv 1:17-18). Jesus Christ worked not for his own benefit but for those who commit themselves to him (Mk 10:45; Rom 5:6-8; 1 Thes 5:9-10). By accepting a death he did not deserve, Christ has broken the power of death for his followers.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian is thus delivered from “this body of death” (Rom 7:24) by the power of Christ. Salvation comes through being baptized into Christ’s death (6:3-4), and “dying with Christ” to the world and the law (Rom 7:6; Gal 6:14; Col 2:20). That is, the death of Christ is counted by God as the believer’s death. The rebellious world’s sin (Rom 6:6) and self-idolatry (living for oneself, 2 Cor 5:14-15) become things of the past. The death of Jesus for his people is the means by which his life is given to them (4:10). The result is that believers are separated from the world just as they were once separated from God. From the world’s point of view, they are dead; Christ is their only life (Col 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John expressed it somewhat differently. Jesus came into the world to give life to the dead (Jn 5:24). That life-giving will not happen at the resurrection; it is already happening. All who commit themselves to Jesus pass immediately from death to life. Or, to put it another way, those who keep (obey) his words will never see death (8:51-52). The point is that all who are outside Christ are already dead, and those trusting in Christ are already enjoying life. The radical difference between the Christian and the non-Christian is a difference between life and death.<\/p>\n<p>Naturally, the NT writers knew that Christians die; their problem was to find words to explain the difference from non-Christian death. Believers who die physically are said to be “dead in Christ” (1 Thes 4:16). Or they are not dead at all, but merely “asleep” (1 Cor 15:6, 18, 20, 51; 1 Thes 4:13-15; cf. Jesus’ words, Jn 11:11-14). Although their bodies are dead, deceased believers are not separated from Christ; that is, they are not really dead. All the powers of death and hell cannot separate believers from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). For them, death is not a loss but a gain; it brings them closer to Christ (2 Cor 5:1-10; Phil 1:20-21). What is more, believers will share in Christ’s victory over physical death as well. Because he is the “firstfruits” of those rising from the dead (1 Cor 15:20; Col 1:18), those “in Christ” will rise “on the last day” to be with him, whole and complete.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, for those who do not belong to Christ, there is a final, total separation from God. At the last judgment, all whose names are not “written in the Book of Life” are consigned to a lake of fire, in the company of death itself and hades. That final separation from God is the “second death” (Rv 20:14). Christians, however, have been saved from death (Jas 5:20; 1 Jn 3:14). The second death has no power over those who are faithful to Christ (Rv 2:11; 20:6). Instead, they will live with God, in whose presence there can be no death, for he is life itself (21:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Intermediate State; Wrath of God.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>DEATH<\/h3>\n<p>Cessation of life (physical death) or separation from God (spiritual death).<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"OldTestamentView\">Old Testament View<\/p>\n<p>In the OT death was accepted as the natural end of life. The goal of an Israelite was to live a long and full life, produce many descendants, and die in peace with the children and grandchildren gathered about. The OT contains many protests against an early death (e.g., Hezekiah’s, 2 Kgs 20:1-11). An early death might appear to be the result of God’s judgment; hence, Job saw the need to vindicate his character prior to death (Jb 19:25-26). Only in Ecclesiastes 3:19-20 is outright pessimism expressed in the face of death—and that book probably shows considerable non-Hebraic influence.<\/p>\n<p>Death, although a natural ending to life, was never viewed as pleasant. Death cut one off from human community as well as from the presence and service of God. God may offer comfort in the face of death (Ps 73:23-28), but he is rarely portrayed as present with the dead, and that only in later biblical literature (Ps 139:8). For that reason, death was never viewed as the threshold to a better life.<\/p>\n<p>The relationship of sin to death is seen in the death penalty in the law of Moses. A serious offender was put to death. The punitive phrase “he shall be cut off” implied that although the nation went on living, the criminal was separated from it by death. The Israelites were warned that to disobey God’s commandments could bring premature death as a consequence of breaking fellowship with God (Dt 30:15-20; Jer 21:8; Ez 18:21-32).<\/p>\n<p>In the intertestamental period, as Jewish ideas of afterlife and resurrection developed more explicitly, so too did Jewish thinking about death. Death itself, not just a premature death, came to be seen as an evil result of sin (2 Esd 3:7; Ecclus 25:24). Sometimes all death is depicted as the result of the “first sin” (Adam and Eve’s disobedience). In other references, everyone dies as a result of his or her own sin. The first clear indication in Scripture of a resurrection of the dead and a final judgment or punishment occurs in the book of Daniel (Dn 12:2), one of the last OT books to be written. That teaching is echoed throughout the intertestamental period (2 Esd 7:31-44). During that time, it was believed that the soul survived death either in some immortal form (Wisd of Sol 3:4; 4:1; 4 Macc 16:13; 17:12) or awaiting the resurrection (1 Enoch 102). Some of those extrabiblical writings incorporated Greek ideas that the body was a burden to be gotten rid of—a notion foreign to Hebrew thought.<\/p>\n<p>The concept of resurrection and a life redeemed from death, however, set the stage for the NT revelation focusing on Christ’s resurrection and his conquest of death.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"NewTestamentView\">New Testament View<\/p>\n<p>In the NT, death is seen more as a theological problem than as a personal event. Death goes beyond the simple ending of physical life, which the authors accept almost without difficulty. Death is seen as affecting every part of a person’s life. God alone is immortal, the source of all life in the world (Rom 4:17; 1 Tm 6:16). Only as human beings are properly related to God’s life can they live. But it has been unnatural for people to be in personal communion with the divine source of life since sin was introduced into the world (Rom 5:12, 17-18; 1 Cor 15:22). When Adam separated himself from God, that separation brought death. Each human being has followed in Adam’s footsteps (Rom 3:23; 5:12), bringing death for everyone as the absolutely necessary result (Rom 6:23; Heb 9:27). Death, then, is not merely something that happens to people at the end of their lives; it is also the living out of their lives apart from fellowship with God.<\/p>\n<p>The extent of death’s domination is vast. It affects every aspect of culture. All of human life is lived under the shadow of the fear of death (Rom 8:15; Heb 2:15). Death reigns over all that is “of the flesh” (Rom 8:6). Anyone not living in relationship to Christ lives in a state of death (Jn 3:16-18; 1 Jn 5:12). The devil, who rules the world, is the lord of death (Heb 2:14). Death is sometimes personified as a demonic power at large in the world but finally brought to bay by Christ himself, the only one who could master it (1 Cor 15:26-27; Rv 6:8; 20:13-14).<\/p>\n<p>Christ died, was buried, and rose again on the third day (Rom 4:25; 1 Cor 15:3-4; 1 Thes 4:14). Through that historic event, the power of death was broken. The NT in various ways expresses Christ’s subjection to death in payment for sin. He became obedient to death (Phil 2:8); he died as a sacrifice for the sins of all (1 Cor 5:7; 2 Cor 5:15); and he descended into hades, the place of the dead (1 Pt 3:18-19). The major point of all such passages is that he did not remain dead but defeated the devil, took the power (keys) of death, and ascended in victory (Heb 2:14-15; Rv 1:17-18). Jesus Christ worked not for his own benefit but for those who commit themselves to him (Mk 10:45; Rom 5:6-8; 1 Thes 5:9-10). By accepting a death he did not deserve, Christ has broken the power of death for his followers.<\/p>\n<p>The Christian is thus delivered from “this body of death” (Rom 7:24) by the power of Christ. Salvation comes through being baptized into Christ’s death (6:3-4), and “dying with Christ” to the world and the law (Rom 7:6; Gal 6:14; Col 2:20). That is, the death of Christ is counted by God as the believer’s death. The rebellious world’s sin (Rom 6:6) and self-idolatry (living for oneself, 2 Cor 5:14-15) become things of the past. The death of Jesus for his people is the means by which his life is given to them (4:10). The result is that believers are separated from the world just as they were once separated from God. From the world’s point of view, they are dead; Christ is their only life (Col 3:3).<\/p>\n<p>The apostle John expressed it somewhat differently. Jesus came into the world to give life to the dead (Jn 5:24). That life-giving will not happen at the resurrection; it is already happening. All who commit themselves to Jesus pass immediately from death to life. Or, to put it another way, those who keep (obey) his words will never see death (8:51-52). The point is that all who are outside Christ are already dead, and those trusting in Christ are already enjoying life. The radical difference between the Christian and the non-Christian is a difference between life and death.<\/p>\n<p>Naturally, the NT writers knew that Christians die; their problem was to find words to explain the difference from non-Christian death. Believers who die physically are said to be “dead in Christ” (1 Thes 4:16). Or they are not dead at all, but merely “asleep” (1 Cor 15:6, 18, 20, 51; 1 Thes 4:13-15; cf. Jesus’ words, Jn 11:11-14). Although their bodies are dead, deceased believers are not separated from Christ; that is, they are not really dead. All the powers of death and hell cannot separate believers from Christ (Rom 8:38-39). For them, death is not a loss but a gain; it brings them closer to Christ (2 Cor 5:1-10; Phil 1:20-21). What is more, believers will share in Christ’s victory over physical death as well. Because he is the “firstfruits” of those rising from the dead (1 Cor 15:20; Col 1:18), those “in Christ” will rise “on the last day” to be with him, whole and complete.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, for those who do not belong to Christ, there is a final, total separation from God. At the last judgment, all whose names are not “written in the Book of Life” are consigned to a lake of fire, in the company of death itself and hades. That final separation from God is the “second death” (Rv 20:14). Christians, however, have been saved from death (Jas 5:20; 1 Jn 3:14). The second death has no power over those who are faithful to Christ (Rv 2:11; 20:6). Instead, they will live with God, in whose presence there can be no death, for he is life itself (21:4).<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Dead, Place of the; Intermediate State; Wrath of God.<\/p>","summary_ro":"DEATH Cessation of life (physical death) or separation from God (spiritual death). Old Testament View In the OT death was accepted as the natural end of life. The goal of an Israelite was to live a long and full life, produce many descendants, and die in peace with the children and grandchildren gathered about. The OT contains many protests against an early death (e.g., Hezekiah’s, 2 Kgs 20:1-11). An early death might appear to be the result of God’s judgment; hence, Job saw the need to vindi...","summary_en":"DEATH Cessation of life (physical death) or separation from God (spiritual death). Old Testament View In the OT death was accepted as the natural end of life. The goal of an Israelite was to live a long and full life, produce many descendants, and die in peace with the children and grandchildren gathered about. The OT contains many protests against an early death (e.g., Hezekiah’s, 2 Kgs 20:1-11). An early death might appear to be the result of God’s judgment; hence, Job saw the need to vindi...","source":"Articles\/D.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":10052,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ecclesiastes","title_en":"Book of Ecclesiastes","content_ro":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","summary_en":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":36049,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Spirit of God","title_en":"Spirit of God","content_ro":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>SPIRIT OF GOD<\/h3>\n<p>Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, <span class=\"hebrew\" lang=\"he\">ruach<\/span><em>;<\/em> Greek, <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">pneuma<\/span>) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheOldTestament\">In the Old Testament<\/p>\n<p>There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy.<\/p>\n<p>First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translated “Spirit” in Gn 1:2) that caused the waters of the Flood to subside (8:1). A wind from God blew locusts over Egypt (Ex 10:13) and quail over the camp of Israel. The blast of his nostrils separated the waters of the Red Sea at the exodus (14:21).<\/p>\n<p>Second, it was the breath of God that made man a living being (Gn 2:7). It is one of the earliest perceptions of Hebrew faith that humans live only because of the stirring of the divine breath or spirit within them (Gn 6:3; Jb 33:4; 34:14-15; Ps 104:29-30). Later, a clearer distinction was drawn between divine Spirit and human spirit, and between spirit and soul, but at the earliest stage these were all more or less perceived to be synonymous manifestations of the same divine power, the source of all life—animal as well as human (Gn 7:15, 22; see Eccl 3:19-21).<\/p>\n<p>Third, there were occasions when this divine power seemed to overtake and possess an individual fully, so that his or her words or actions far transcended those of normal behavior. Such a person was clearly marked as an agent of God’s purpose and given respect. This was apparently how leaders were recognized in the premonarchy period—Othniel (Jgs 3:10), Gideon (6:34), Jephthah (11:29), and the first king, Saul (1 Sm 11:6), as well. So, too, the earliest prophets were those whose inspiration came in ecstasy (1 Sm 19:20-24).<\/p>\n<p>In the earlier stages of Hebrew thought, ecstatic experience was seen as the direct effect of divine power. This was true even when the ecstasy was recognized as evil in character, as in the case of Saul’s seizure by the Spirit (1 Sm 16:14-16). A spirit from God could be for evil as well as for good (see Jgs 9:23; 1 Kgs 22:19-23).<\/p>\n<h5>In the Writings of the Prophets<\/h5>\n<p>For Isaiah, the spirit was that which characterized God and distinguished him and his actions from human affairs (Is 31:3). Later, the adjective “holy” appeared as that which distinguished the Spirit of God from any other spirit, human or divine (Ps 51:11; Is 63:10-11).<\/p>\n<p>The problem of false prophecy emphasized the danger of assuming that every message delivered in ecstasy was the word of the Lord. Thus, tests of prophecy evaluated the content of the message delivered or the character of the prophet’s life, not the degree or quality of inspiration (see Dt 13:1-5; 18:22; Jer 23:14; Mi 3:5). This sense of a need to discriminate between true and false inspiration and to distinguish the word of God from the merely ecstatic oracle may help to explain the otherwise puzzling reluctance of the major eighth- and seventh-century <span>BC<\/span> prophets to attribute their inspiration to the Spirit.<\/p>\n<h5>In the Exilic and Postexilic Writings<\/h5>\n<p>In exilic and postexilic literature, the role of the Spirit is narrowed to two major functions: that of the prophetic Spirit and that of the Spirit of the age to come.<\/p>\n<p>The later prophets again spoke of the Spirit in explicit terms as the inspirer of prophecy (see Ez 3:1-4, 22-24; Hg 2:5; Zec 4:6). As they looked back to the preexilic period, these prophets freely attributed the inspiration of “the former prophets” to the Spirit as well (Zec 7:12).<\/p>\n<p>This tendency to exalt the Spirit’s role as the inspirer of prophecy became steadily stronger in the period between the OT and NT, until in rabbinic Judaism the Spirit was almost exclusively the inspirer of the prophetic writings now regarded as Scripture.<\/p>\n<p>The other understanding of the Spirit’s role during exilic and postexilic times was that the Spirit would be the manifestation of the power of God in the age to come. That eschatological hope of divine power effecting a final cleansing and a renewed creation is rooted principally in Isaiah’s prophecies (Is 4:4; 32:15; 44:3-4). Isaiah speaks of one anointed by the Spirit to accomplish complete and final salvation (11:2; 42:1; 61:1). Elsewhere, the same longing is expressed in terms of the Spirit being freely dispensed to all Israel (Ez 39:29; Jl 2:28-29; Zec 12:10) in the new covenant (Jer 31:31-34; Ez 36:26-27).<\/p>\n<p>In the period prior to Jesus, the understanding of the Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy and as the Spirit of the age to come had developed into the widespread dogma that the Spirit was no longer to be experienced in the present. The Spirit had been known in the past as the inspirer of prophetic writings, but after Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, the Spirit had withdrawn (1 Macc 4:44-46; 9:27; 2 Bar 85:1-3; see also Ps 74:9; Zec 13:2-6). The Spirit would be known again in the age of the Messiah, but in the interim the Spirit was absent from Israel. Even the great Hillel (learned Jewish leader and teacher, 60? <span>BC<\/span>–<span>AD<\/span> 20?), a near contemporary of Jesus, had not received the Spirit—though if anyone was worthy of the Spirit, it was he. There is a tradition that at a meeting of Hillel and other wise men, a voice from heaven said, “Among those here present is one who would have deserved the Holy Spirit to rest upon him, if his time had been worthy of it.” The wise men all looked at Hillel.<\/p>\n<p>The consequence of this accepted dearth of the Spirit was that the Spirit in effect became subordinated to the law. The Spirit was the inspirer of the law, but since the Spirit could no longer be experienced directly, the law became the sole voice of the Spirit. It was this increasing dominance of the law and its authoritative interpreters that provided the background for the mission of Jesus and the initial spread of Christianity.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"IntheNewTestament\">In the New Testament<\/p>\n<p>If we are to understand the NT’s teaching on the Spirit, we must recognize both its continuity and discontinuity with the OT. At many points NT usage cannot be fully understood except against the background of OT concepts or passages. For example, the ambiguity of John 3:8 (“wind,” “Spirit”), 2 Thessalonians 2:8 (“breath”), and Revelation 11:11 (“breath of life”) takes us back to the basic Hebrew meanings of “spirit.” Acts 8:39 and Revelation 17:3 and 21:10 reflect the same conception of the Spirit that we find in 1 Kings 18:12, 2 Kings 2:16, and Ezekiel 3:14. The NT writers generally share the rabbinic view that Scripture has the authority of the Spirit behind it (see Mk 12:36; Acts 28:25; Heb 3:7; 2 Pt 1:21). The principal continuity is that the NT brings the fulfillment of what the OT writers looked forward to. At the same time, Christianity is not simply fulfilled Judaism. Jesus’ coming and his giving of his Spirit to live within his believers marks off the new faith as something new and distinct.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of the New Age<\/h5>\n<p>The most striking feature of Jesus’ ministry and of the message of the earliest Christians was their conviction and proclamation that the blessings of the new age were already present, that the eschatological Spirit had already been poured out. With the exception of the Essenes at Qumran, no other group or individual within the Jewish religion of that time had dared to make such a bold claim. The prophets and the rabbis looked for a messianic age yet to come, and the apocalyptic writers warned of its imminent arrival, but none thought of it as already present. Even John the Baptist spoke only of one about to come and of the Spirit’s operation in the imminent future (Mk 1:8). But for Jesus and first-century Christians, the longed for hope was a living reality, and the claim carried with it the exciting sense of being in “the last days.” Without some recognition of that eschatological dimension of the Christians’ faith and life, we cannot understand this teaching on, and experience of, the Spirit.<\/p>\n<p>Jesus clearly thought of his teachings and healings as fulfillment of the prophetic hope (Mt 12:41-42; 13:16-17; Lk 17:20-21). In particular, he saw himself as the one anointed by the Spirit to provide salvation (Mt 5:3-6; 11:5; Lk 4:17-19). So, too, Jesus understood his exorcisms as the effect of the power of God and as manifestations of the end-time rule of God (Mt 12:27-28; Mk 3:22-26). The Gospel writers, especially Luke, emphasize the eschatological character of Jesus’ life and ministry by stressing the role of the Spirit in his birth (Mt 1:18; Lk 1:35, 41, 67; 2:25-27), his baptism (Mk 1:9-10; Acts 10:38), and his ministry (Mt 4:1; 12:18; Mk 1:12; Lk 4:1, 14; 10:21; Jn 3:34).<\/p>\n<p>The Christian church began with the in-breathing of the Holy Spirit on the day of Christ’s resurrection (Jn 20:22), followed by the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost “in the last days.” The overwhelming experience of vision and inspired utterance was taken as proof positive that the new age prophesied by Joel had now arrived (Acts 2:2-5, 17-18). Similarly, in Hebrews the gift of the Spirit is spoken of as “the powers of the age to come” (Heb 6:4-5). More striking still is Paul’s understanding of the Spirit as the guarantee of God’s complete salvation (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13-14), and as the first installment of the believer’s inheritance of God’s kingdom (Rom 8:15-17; 1 Cor 6:9-11; 15:42-50; Gal 4:6-7; 5:16-18, 21-23; Eph 1:13-14). The Spirit is here again thought of as the power of the age to come, as that power (which will characterize God’s rule at the end of time) already shaping and transforming the lives of believers.<\/p>\n<p>For Paul, this means also that the gift of the Spirit is but the beginning of a lifelong process that will not end until the believer’s whole person is brought under the Spirit’s power (Rom 8:11, 23; 1 Cor 15:44-49; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:1-5). It also means that the present experience of faith is one of lifelong tension between what God has already begun to bring about in the believer’s life and what has not yet been brought under God’s grace (Phil 1:6). It is this tension between life “in the Spirit” and life “in the flesh” (see Gal 2:20) that comes to poignant expression in Romans 7:24 and 2 Corinthians 5:2-4.<\/p>\n<h5>The Spirit of New Life<\/h5>\n<p>Since the Spirit is the mark of the new age, it is not surprising that the NT writers understood the gift of the Spirit to be that which brings an individual into the new age. John the Baptist described the way the coming one would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Mt 3:11). According to Acts 1:5 and 11:16, this imagery was taken up by Jesus, and the promise is seen as fulfilled at Pentecost—the outpouring of the Spirit here being understood as the risen Christ’s action in drawing his disciples into the new age (Acts 2:17, 33).<\/p>\n<p>It seems to be one of Luke’s aims in the book of Acts to highlight the central importance of the gift of the Spirit in conversion-initiation—it is that decisive “gift of the Holy Spirit” that makes one a Christian (Acts 2:38-39). People could have been followers of Jesus on earth, but it was only when they received the gift of the Spirit that they could be said to have “believed in the Lord Jesus Christ” (11:16-17). When the Spirit’s presence was manifested in and upon a person’s life, that was recognized by Peter as proof enough that God had accepted that person, even though he or she had not yet made any formal profession of faith or been baptized (10:44-48; 11:15-18; 15:7-9). So too Apollos, already aglow with the Spirit (18:25), even though his knowledge of “the way of God” was slightly defective (vv 24-26), apparently was not required to supplement his “baptism of John” with Christian baptism. However, the 12 so-called disciples at Ephesus proved by their very ignorance of the Spirit that they were not yet disciples of the Lord Jesus (19:1-6). Paul asked these 12 men, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” (19:2).<\/p>\n<p>This accords with Paul’s emphasis in his letters. Belief and reception of the Spirit go together: to receive the Spirit is to begin the Christian life (Gal 3:2-3); to be baptized in the Spirit is to become a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13); to “have the Spirit of Christ” is to belong to Christ (Rom 8:9-11); to receive the Spirit is tantamount to becoming a child of God (Rom 8:14-17; Gal 4:6-7). The Spirit so characterizes the new age and the life of the new age that only the gift of the Spirit can bring a person into the new age to experience the life of the new age. For the Spirit is distinctively and peculiarly the life-giver; the Spirit indeed <em>is<\/em> the life of the new age (Rom 8:2, 6, 10; 1 Cor 15:45; 2 Cor 3:6; Gal 5:25).<\/p>\n<p>In just the same way in John’s writings, the Spirit is characteristically the life-giving Spirit (Jn 6:63), the power from above, the seed of divine life that brings about the new birth (Jn 3:3-8; 1 Jn 3:9), and a river of living water that brings life when one believes in Christ (Jn 7:37-39; so also 4:10, 14). Or again, reception of the Spirit in John 20:22 is depicted as a new creation analogous to Genesis 2:7. Consequently, in 1 John 3:24 and 4:13, possession and experience of the Spirit count as one of the “tests of life” listed in that letter.<\/p>\n<h5>Manifestations of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It will be clear from what has already been said that when the first Christians, like the ancient Hebrews, spoke of the Spirit, they were thinking of experiences of divine power. In the NT, as in the OT, “Spirit” is the word used to explain the experience of new life and vitality (see above), of liberation from legalism (e.g., Rom 8:2; 2 Cor 3:17), of spiritual refreshing and renewal (cf. e.g., Is 32:15; Ez 39:29 with Jn 7:37-39; Rom 5:5; 1 Cor 12:13; 1 Tm 3:5-6). It is important to realize how wide a range of experiences were attributed to the Spirit: ecstatic experiences (Acts 2:24; 10:43-47; 19:6; cf. 10:10; 22:17—“in ecstasy”; 2 Cor 12:1-4; Rv 1:10), emotional experiences (e.g., love—Rom 5:5; joy—Acts 13:52; 1 Thes 1:6; see also Gal 5:22; Phil 2:1-2), experiences of illumination (2 Cor 3:14-17; Eph 1:17-18; Heb 6:4-5; 1 Jn 2:20-21), and experiences issuing in moral transformation (1 Cor 6:9-11). Likewise, when Paul speaks of spiritual gifts, called <span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">charismata<\/span> (acts or words that bring divine grace to concrete expression), he evidently has a wide range of actual events in mind: inspired speech (1 Cor 12:8-10; 1 Thes 1:5), miracles and healings (1 Cor 12:9; Gal 3:5; cf. Heb 2:4), and various acts of service and help, of counsel and administration, and of aid and mercy (Rom 12:7-8; 1 Cor 12:28).<\/p>\n<p>In talking thus of the Spirit in terms of experience, we should not overemphasize particular experiences or manifestations, as though earliest Christianity consisted of a sequence of mountaintop experiences or spiritual highs. There clearly were such experiences, indeed a wide range of experiences, but no one experience is singled out to be sought by all (except prophecy). There is no distinctively second (or third) experience of the Spirit in the NT, and Paul warned against overvaluing particular manifestations of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:6-19; 2 Cor 12:1-10; cf. Mk 8:11-13). Where particular experiences are valued, it is as manifestations of a more sustained experience, particular expressions of an underlying relationship (cf. Acts 6:3-5; 11:24—“full of the Spirit”; Eph 5:18). What we are in touch with here is the vigor of the experiential dimension of earliest Christianity. If the Spirit is the breath of the new life in Christ (cf. Ez 37:9-10, 14; Jn 20:22; 1 Cor 15:45), then presumably the analogy extends further, and the experience of the Spirit is like the experience of breathing: one is not conscious of it all the time, but if one is not conscious of it, at least sometimes, something is wrong.<\/p>\n<h5>The Fellowship of the Spirit<\/h5>\n<p>It was out of this shared experience of the Spirit that the earliest Christian community grew and developed, for this is what “the fellowship [<span class=\"greek\" lang=\"el\">koinonia<\/span>] of the Spirit” properly means: common participation in the same Spirit (Phil 2:1; cf. Acts 2:42; 1 Cor 1:4-9). It was the gift of the Spirit that brought those in Samaria, Caesarea, and elsewhere effectively into the community of the Spirit (Act 8, 10). So also, it was the experience of the one Spirit that provided the unifying bond in the churches of Paul’s mission (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:3-4; Phil 2:1-2). Here we see the real importance of the divine manifestations of the Spirit for Paul: it is out of the diversity of these particular manifestations that the body of Christ grows in unity (Rom 12:4-8; 1 Cor 12:12-17; Eph 4:4-16).<\/p>","summary_ro":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","summary_en":"SPIRIT OF GOD Description of God in action, God in motion. The word “spirit” (Hebrew, ruach; Greek, pneuma) is the word used from ancient times to describe and explain the experience of divine power working in, upon, and around people. In the Old Testament There are three basic meanings evident in the use of “spirit” from the earliest Hebrew writings: It was a wind from God, it was the breath of life, and it was a spirit of ecstasy. First, it was a wind from God (the same Hebrew word translat...","source":"Articles\/S.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":50820,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:19","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:19<\/strong> With respect to breathing and dying, <em>people have no real advantage over the animals<\/em><em>,<\/em> but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:19<\/strong> With respect to breathing and dying, <em>people have no real advantage over the animals<\/em><em>,<\/em> but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:19 With respect to breathing and dying, people have no real advantage over the animals, but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).","summary_en":"3:19 With respect to breathing and dying, people have no real advantage over the animals, but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78446,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:19","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:19<\/strong> With respect to breathing and dying, <em>people have no real advantage over the animals<\/em><em>,<\/em> but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:19<\/strong> With respect to breathing and dying, <em>people have no real advantage over the animals<\/em><em>,<\/em> but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:19 With respect to breathing and dying, people have no real advantage over the animals, but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).","summary_en":"3:19 With respect to breathing and dying, people have no real advantage over the animals, but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106072,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:19","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:19<\/strong> With respect to breathing and dying, <em>people have no real advantage over the animals<\/em><em>,<\/em> but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:19<\/strong> With respect to breathing and dying, <em>people have no real advantage over the animals<\/em><em>,<\/em> but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:19 With respect to breathing and dying, people have no real advantage over the animals, but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).","summary_en":"3:19 With respect to breathing and dying, people have no real advantage over the animals, but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133698,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:19","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:19","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:19<\/strong> With respect to breathing and dying, <em>people have no real advantage over the animals<\/em><em>,<\/em> but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:19<\/strong> With respect to breathing and dying, <em>people have no real advantage over the animals<\/em><em>,<\/em> but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:19 With respect to breathing and dying, people have no real advantage over the animals, but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).","summary_en":"3:19 With respect to breathing and dying, people have no real advantage over the animals, but we have other advantages (e.g., see Gen 1:26-28).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"20":[{"id":50821,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:20","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:20<\/strong> <em>from dust . . . to dust:<\/em> The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:20<\/strong> <em>from dust . . . to dust:<\/em> The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:20 from dust . . . to dust: The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).","summary_en":"3:20 from dust . . . to dust: The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78447,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:20","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:20<\/strong> <em>from dust . . . to dust:<\/em> The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:20<\/strong> <em>from dust . . . to dust:<\/em> The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:20 from dust . . . to dust: The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).","summary_en":"3:20 from dust . . . to dust: The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106073,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:20","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:20<\/strong> <em>from dust . . . to dust:<\/em> The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:20<\/strong> <em>from dust . . . to dust:<\/em> The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:20 from dust . . . to dust: The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).","summary_en":"3:20 from dust . . . to dust: The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133699,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:20","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:20","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:20<\/strong> <em>from dust . . . to dust:<\/em> The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:20<\/strong> <em>from dust . . . to dust:<\/em> The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:20 from dust . . . to dust: The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).","summary_en":"3:20 from dust . . . to dust: The Teacher refers to God’s judgment against human rebellion in Eden (see Gen 3:19).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"21":[{"id":10043,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ecclesiastes","title_en":"Book of Ecclesiastes","content_ro":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","summary_en":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":50822,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:21","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:21<\/strong> <em>the human spirit goes up:<\/em> Cp. 12:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:21<\/strong> <em>the human spirit goes up:<\/em> Cp. 12:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:21 the human spirit goes up: Cp. 12:7.","summary_en":"3:21 the human spirit goes up: Cp. 12:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78448,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:21","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:21<\/strong> <em>the human spirit goes up:<\/em> Cp. 12:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:21<\/strong> <em>the human spirit goes up:<\/em> Cp. 12:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:21 the human spirit goes up: Cp. 12:7.","summary_en":"3:21 the human spirit goes up: Cp. 12:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106074,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:21","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:21<\/strong> <em>the human spirit goes up:<\/em> Cp. 12:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:21<\/strong> <em>the human spirit goes up:<\/em> Cp. 12:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:21 the human spirit goes up: Cp. 12:7.","summary_en":"3:21 the human spirit goes up: Cp. 12:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133700,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:21","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:21","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:21<\/strong> <em>the human spirit goes up:<\/em> Cp. 12:7.<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:21<\/strong> <em>the human spirit goes up:<\/em> Cp. 12:7.<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:21 the human spirit goes up: Cp. 12:7.","summary_en":"3:21 the human spirit goes up: Cp. 12:7.","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}],"22":[{"id":10037,"type":"article","type_label":"Articol","type_icon":"📖","type_color":"#d4af37","title_ro":"Book of Ecclesiastes","title_en":"Book of Ecclesiastes","content_ro":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>ECCLESIASTES, Book of<\/h3>\n<p>OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.<\/p>\n<p>“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”<\/p>\n<p>The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book (Eccl 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher” in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the community of wise men.<\/p>\n<p>Preview<\/p>\n<p>• Author<\/p>\n<p>• Date<\/p>\n<p>• Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>• Content<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Author\">Author<\/p>\n<p>The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.” Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s purpose and meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of non-Solomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become king in Jerusalem.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men rather than kings (see 1 Kgs 4:31).<\/p>\n<p>One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by the historical writers.<\/p>\n<p>The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of Ecclesiastes.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Date\">Date<\/p>\n<p>The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 <span>BC<\/span>). The book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom, by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.<\/p>\n<p>Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A Maccabean date (c. 165 <span>BC<\/span>) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of the book, dated in the second century <span>BC<\/span>, have been found at the Dead Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably written in the early second century <span>BC<\/span>, was heavily influenced by Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.<\/p>\n<p>A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young, have assigned a fifth-century <span>BC<\/span> date to the book. Many others consider it a third-century <span>BC<\/span> document.<\/p>\n<h5>Internal Evidence<\/h5>\n<p>Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would not fit with the reign of Solomon.<\/p>\n<p>It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts. That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the Syro-Palestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 <span>BC<\/span>).<\/p>\n<p>One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle. The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom literature (<em>Instruction of Amen-em-opet<\/em> 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, <em>The Words of Ahiqar,<\/em> the golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you]; be not (too) bitter [<em>lest they spit you out<\/em>].” But the golden mean concept need not indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.<\/p>\n<h5>Linguistic Considerations<\/h5>\n<p>The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.<\/p>\n<p>Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.<\/p>\n<p>It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew, particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.<\/p>\n<p>The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and Phoenicia were quite common.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"PurposeandTheologicalTeaching\">Purpose and Theological Teaching<\/p>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape. According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.<\/p>\n<p>The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human deeds have meaning.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a life had no meaning.<\/p>\n<p>A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22. The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the everyday routines of life (cf. Jer 22:15; Lk 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase, then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not endured.<\/p>\n<p>In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes. Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.<\/p>\n<p>Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God, humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21). The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).<\/p>\n<p>The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul rendered the same verdict on the created world in Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses all things in his world to work out good results for his people (Rom 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly helpful.<\/p>\n<p>Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good and necessary things that come from God’s hand.<\/p>\n<p class=\"h2\" id=\"Content\">Content<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of the Cycle of History and Nature (1:1-11)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Koheleth’s Own Experience (1:12–2:26)<\/h5>\n<p>In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (vv 12-17). Human toil is also vain (vv 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the reward of one’s toil (v 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept God’s providence joyfully (vv 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.<\/p>\n<h5>The Plight of Humanity apart from God (3:1-22)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the physical (v 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God, people really are no better than animals (vv 19-20).<\/p>\n<h5>Conclusions Resulting from Koheleth’s Observations (4:1-16)<\/h5>\n<p>The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are better faced with a partner than alone (vv 9-12).<\/p>\n<h5>The Vanity of Living Only for Oneself (5:1–6:12)<\/h5>\n<p>Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:1-2, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom for Living (7:1–8:17)<\/h5>\n<p>This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and personal references (vv 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity as well as prosperity (v 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13. Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Eccl 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine satisfaction.<\/p>\n<h5>Observations on Life’s Seeming Injustices (9:1-18)<\/h5>\n<p>“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (vv 13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits (vv 7-10).<\/p>\n<h5>Wisdom and Folly (10:1-20)<\/h5>\n<p>Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and folly can lead to ruin.<\/p>\n<h5>Koheleth’s Conclusion—Fear God (11:1–12:14)<\/h5>\n<p>The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is to fear God (vv 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.<\/p>\n<p><em>See also<\/em> Solomon (Person); Wisdom; Wisdom Literature.<\/p>","summary_ro":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","summary_en":"ECCLESIASTES, Book of OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character, posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence. “Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David, King in Jerusalem.” It is also ...","source":"Articles\/E.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":50823,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>happy in their work:<\/em> Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>happy in their work:<\/em> Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22 happy in their work: Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).","summary_en":"3:22 happy in their work: Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":78449,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>happy in their work:<\/em> Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>happy in their work:<\/em> Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22 happy in their work: Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).","summary_en":"3:22 happy in their work: Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":106075,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>happy in their work:<\/em> Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>happy in their work:<\/em> Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22 happy in their work: Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).","summary_en":"3:22 happy in their work: Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":133701,"type":"study_note","type_label":"Notă de studiu","type_icon":"📝","type_color":"#06b6d4","title_ro":"Notă de studiu: Eclesiastul 3:22","title_en":"Study Note: Eclesiastul 3:22","content_ro":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>happy in their work:<\/em> Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).<\/p>","content_en":"<p><strong>3:22<\/strong> <em>happy in their work:<\/em> Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).<\/p>","summary_ro":"3:22 happy in their work: Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).","summary_en":"3:22 happy in their work: Work now stands alone as a source of enjoyment, apart from food and drink (cp. 2:24-25; 3:12-13).","source":"StudyNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":63698,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","title_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","content_ro":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","summary_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":91324,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","title_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","content_ro":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","summary_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":118950,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","title_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","content_ro":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","summary_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false},{"id":146576,"type":"theme_note","type_label":"Temă biblică","type_icon":"🎯","type_color":"#ef4444","title_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","title_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts","content_ro":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","content_en":"<h3>Enjoying God’s Gifts<\/h3>\n<p>The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, drink, health, proper clothes, our loving spouse, children, daily work, and entertainment. It may be surprising to hear such joy in Ecclesiastes, a book that acknowledges such intense tragedy and frustration. But it is exactly this balance of joy and sorrow that characterizes the wise person who reflects on all of life and understands its complexities in a fallen world.<\/p>\n<p>It is when we treat the things of life and their enjoyment as ends in themselves that they are deterrents to happiness. The Teacher speaks strongly against the pursuit of pleasure for its own sake as foolish and without profit (2:1-2; 7:4; 10:16-19; see also Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20).<\/p>\n<p>The New Testament encourages us to be joyful in all things, including trials and challenges (Phil 4:4; Jas 1:2). One tradition in Christianity states that “the chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy him forever” (<em>Westminster Shorter Catechism,<\/em> Question 1).<\/p>\n<p><strong>Passages for Further Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Eccl 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 4:6; 5:18-20; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10; Isa 22:13; 56:12; Luke 12:19-20; Phil 4:4; Col 2:20-22; Jas 1:2; 4:13-16<\/p>","summary_ro":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","summary_en":"Enjoying God’s Gifts The conclusion of many of the Teacher’s reflections in Ecclesiastes is that we are responsible for enjoying life because it is God’s gift (see 2:24-25; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18; 6:9; 8:15; 9:7-9; 11:7-10). Although there are conditions in which it would seemingly be better not to be alive, life is meant to be enjoyed with laughing, dancing, love, and peace. It is especially worth living when old age and death challenge that joy (9:4, 10; 11:7-9; 12:1). We are to enjoy our food, ...","source":"ThemeNotes.xml","external_url":null,"has_map":false,"has_picture":false}]},"labels":{"article":"Articol","map":"Hartă","chart":"Diagramă","textbox":"Notă explicativă","picture":"Imagine","profile":"Profil","study_note":"Notă de studiu","theme_note":"Temă biblică"},"icons":{"article":"📖","map":"🗺️","chart":"📊","textbox":"💡","picture":"🖼️","profile":"👤","study_note":"📝","theme_note":"🎯"},"typeColors":{"article":"#d4af37","map":"#2d7d46","chart":"#3b82f6","textbox":"#8b5cf6","picture":"#ec4899","profile":"#f59e0b","study_note":"#06b6d4","theme_note":"#ef4444"}}
🔍
Niciun rezultat
Nu am găsit versete care să conțină textul căutat.
Eclesiastul 3
— 22 versete
Eclesiastul 3
📘 Info carte
Se încarcă...
📖 Resurse