TromboneChat

Quote from: timothy42b on Feb 17, 2017, 10:52AMI read your "in other words" to mean that man cannot enjoy the eating and the hard work UNLESS he understands it to be a gift of God.  If that was not your intent then I misunderstood you.

My complete point was really that through the common grace of God, all men can enjoy eating and drinking-- it is a gift from God-- but that the enjoyment of it is inconsistent unless one acknowledge those gifts as coming from the hand of God.  Unbelievers should live like the Peggy Lee song, but inconsistently they don't.  They do enjoy those gifts from God, even though their worldview ought to tell them otherwise.

Dave and I had a brief exchange about that when I suggested that, from a traditional Christian viewpoint, this was a suppression of the truth.

Quote from: John the Theologian on Feb 17, 2017, 04:50AMDepends on which serious OT scholars you look at to claim that it is "well-established."  There are a number of well respected and well credentialed OT scholare that would dispute that.  There's a difference between a belief that is quite under-developed and a belief that is absent.

Tim, here's probably the best recent work on Sheol in the OT and it argues for the under-developed notion of afterlife.  The author is a well-respected British author who has taught at several well-known British universities.

https://www.amazon.com/Shades-Sheol-Death-Afterlife-Testament/dp/0830826874

Quote from: John the Theologian on Feb 17, 2017, 11:02AMMy complete point was really that through the common grace of God, all men can enjoy eating and drinking-- it is a gift from God-- but that the enjoyment of it is inconsistent unless one acknowledge those gifts as coming from the hand of God.  Unbelievers should live like the Peggy Lee song, but inconsistently they don't.  They do enjoy those gifts from God, even though their worldview ought to tell them otherwise.
 
Dave and I had a brief exchange about that when I suggested that, from a traditional Christian viewpoint, this was a suppression of the truth.
I find it pretty amazing, even if not surprising, that an educated adult can actually buy any of that.
 
But as I understand it this topic is about theology rather than evangelism or skepticism.
 
Discussion is welcome, but not discussion that's liable to derail the topic's purpose.

Quote from: Baron von Bone on Feb 17, 2017, 03:21PM
I find it pretty amazing, even if not surprising, that an educated adult can actually buy any of that.
 
But as I understand it this topic is about theology rather than evangelism or skepticism.
 
Discussion is welcome, but not discussion that's liable to derail the topic's purpose.

BVB, I don't think that I attempted to derail the topic, but I'll let the others who contribute regularly tell me if I did.

BTW, there are many with PhDs in many fields, including Philosophy, the hard sciences, math, etc. that are far smarter than I am who would completely agree with my perspective, so you should realize that comments such as you made are not really helpful.

Quote from: John the Theologian on Feb 17, 2017, 03:32PMBVB, I don't think that I attempted to derail the topic, but I'll let the others who contribute regularly tell me if I did.I didn't suggest it was an attempt at any such thing, simply that the topic is ... well, it's back there to re-read and see what it actually says.
 
Quote from: John the Theologian on Feb 17, 2017, 03:32PMBTW, there are many with PhDs in many fields, including Philosophy, the hard sciences, math, etc. that are far smarter than I am who would completely agree with my perspective, so you should realize that comments such as you made are not really helpful.I'd be kinda surprised of you actually don't know better than that.
 
How about let's not go off on a pointless tangent though ... eh?

Quote from: Baron von Bone on Feb 17, 2017, 06:16PM
How about let's not go off on a pointless tangent though ... eh?

Good idea! Quit doing it.

While I'm still intrigued about the parameters of John's "borrowed capital" idea (e.g. if I were raised in Pakistan, would I be borrowing my capital from Islam? Israel - Judaism? India - Hinduism? etc. etc. e.g.2 I could turn it around and argue that believers are borrowing capital from unbelievers, or that Christianity is borrowing capital from Judaism. And what kinds of things does John view as being borrowed in general? I'd be interested to learn more about your view, John - perhaps by email?), it probably is about time for the next chapter summary, lest we lose sight of it. I'll leave the topic offshoot with something for John to ponder on:

Quote from: John the Theologian on Feb 17, 2017, 11:02AMUnbelievers should live like the Peggy Lee song, but inconsistently they don't.

Question to ponder: Does this perhaps mean that the view of unbelievers that implies this is somehow faulty? It evidently doesn't explain unbelievers as well as it hopes to.

Btw, forum threads are not 'owned' by anyone except the forum owner. Neither I nor Martin have any practical ownership over this thread; everyone is free to make of it what they will. One may sometimes get a bit vexed with people for trampling on a conversation (e.g. what ronkny and B0B used to do to the "Religion - good or bad" thread), but that's not been happening here. Indeed I'm as guilty for the latest digression as anyone. The theme of Ecclesiastes is the challenge to humans not to feel sad at not being at the centre of the universe, and the recommended treatment is applicable to believers and non-believers alike - but the reasons for adoption of it differ. We haven't really left the topic at all. In some lights, I think that those reasons are the central point of divergence between those who do and don't believe. This is important stuff.

Ecclesiastes 7 text

Highlights

 - the world is crooked. Why?

Summary

 - the wise know to learn from evil
 - but evil has its dangers
 - wisdom is valuable
 - God has made the good and the bad times: enjoy the good and use the bad to realise that life is pointless, crooked.
 - the vain investigator sees that life is crooked and decides that you might as well go with the flow, take the easy path, but cant find wisdom
 - and discovers too, that people are crooked and perverse.
 - but who is wise enough to understand this

Questions and Observations

1) I think chapter 8:1 concludes this chapter

Ah Martin, I was making chapter 7 in parallel! That's only happened a few times so far. Here's my effort:

Ecclesiastes 7 text

Highlights

 - Keep yourself on the straight and narrow, and maintain the perspective that wisdom takes you to in all circumstances

Summary

 - Prevention is better than cure
 - Only in sadness do we see the whole shape of things
 - Beware misplaced nostalgia
 - Don't flatter yourself with selective perception
 - If God has created something in a crooked fashion, don't attempt to make it straight
 - Keep perspective at times of triumph and failure
 - Don't take the imprecations of others too seriously
 - Nobody is so righteous that they never go wrong
 - The author shows us some misogyny

Questions and Observations

1) So here I am making the next chapter summary to recall us to our purpose [though in fact Martin beat me to it...]. It's great to have people other than Martin and myself contributing to the debate - please keep it up, tying in with the material covered! I wonder if any of you would consider taking the 15 mins or so that is all it takes to pen a brief chapter overview?
2) I have freely summarised much of the verse section as "Only in sadness do we see the whole shape of things", which seems to me to be its central message. Does anyone think differently? Read literally, it is a somewhat strange piece of poetry, seeming to say that it is better to have finished with things than to be starting them, which on its own is not a great message.
3) This segment is rather like the Proverbs.
4) Are humans included in the "crooked" things created by God? If so, what does this say about the possibility of Christian salvation for such created-crooked humans? Isn't this a bit unfair on those made so to be condemned?
5) 'Don't fix things that started out crooked' is a fatalistic mantra. We've noted in this book strands of fatalistic thought already. To my mind, such strands represent a straying into philosophical error in a text that is in general philosophically quite strong.
6) Vv15-17 strike me as peculiar. The writer recalls instances of "righteous" people having large bad fortune and "wicked" people having large good fortune, which is a consistent kind of example to draw to the topic material. But then the moral that they draw is: "Be not overly righteous, and do not make yourself too wise. Why should you destroy yourself? Be not overly wicked, neither be a fool. Why should you die before your time?"
7) In vv28-29 the author goes seriously awry, foraying into basic misogyny.
8) It's interesting that these two summaries for the same chapter are fairly divergent.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 18, 2017, 02:24AM
Ecclesiastes 7 text

...

1) So here I am making the next chapter summary to recall us to our purpose [though in fact Martin beat me to it...]. It's great to have people other than Martin and myself contributing to the debate - please keep it up, tying in with the material covered! I wonder if any of you would consider taking the 15 mins or so that is all it takes to pen a brief chapter overview?

I agree, and I'd encourage polite discussion about the text and reasonably close tangents too.
 
Quote2) I have freely summarised much of the verse section as "Only in sadness do we see the whole shape of things", which seems to me to be its central message. Does anyone think differently? Read literally, it is a somewhat strange piece of poetry, seeming to say that it is better to have finished with things than to be starting them, which on its own is not a great message.

I freely summarised too.  I think our main difference was I used "evil" and you used "sadness" to generalise the suffering that was being described in different ways in the passage.  Sadness is a good fit.

Quote3) This segment is rather like the Proverbs.
4) Are humans included in the "crooked" things created by God? If so, what does this say about the possibility of Christian salvation for such created-crooked humans? Isn't this a bit unfair on those made so to be condemned?

Yes, humans are crooked too but v29 says that God made men (aka humans) upright but they have sought many schemes.  Crooked humans go off track because they want too.  So in that regard I think that they can be held responsible for their decision.  You wouldn't want to be constrained to behave in ways that you didn't want would you?

But fortunately God saves crooked humans, who realise that they are crooked and want not to be.

And FWIW I don't think that God is too concerned about fair.

Quote5) 'Don't fix things that started out crooked' is a fatalistic mantra. We've noted in this book strands of fatalistic thought already. To my mind, such strands represent a straying into philosophical error in a text that is in general philosophically quite strong.

from his PoV "under the sun" what is the point of trying to fix things when its all meaningless, vain.  What is his philosophical error?

Quote6) Vv15-17 strike me as peculiar. The writer recalls instances of "righteous" people having large bad fortune and "wicked" people having large good fortune, which is a consistent kind of example to draw to the topic material. But then the moral that they draw is: "Be not overly righteous, and do not make yourself too wise. Why should you destroy yourself? Be not overly wicked, neither be a fool. Why should you die before your time?"

once again, his point is that the world "under the sun" is pointless, or meaningless, so there's no point in sacrificing to try fix stuff?  Just go with the flow and make the most of what life has given you.

Quote7) In vv28-29 the author goes seriously awry, foraying into basic misogyny.

v28 is his report on the data that he has.  Not misogyny just stats. His conclusion from the stats in v29 is that man has been created good but gone astray.  That's not misogyny.

Quote8) It's interesting that these two summaries for the same chapter are fairly divergent.

I think that given the text is poetic and uses lots of metaphors that its not surprising we describe it differently.  ( and am I being inconsistent going from stats to metaphors?)

Ecclesiastes 8 text

Highlights

 - life is unjust: enjoy what you can

Summary

 - Keep the kings command: his word is almost supreme
 - more vanity:
   - the evil aren't punished speedily: but you're better off fearing God, because judgement will
   - sometimes the innocent are punished instead of the wicked
   - you just have to enjoy what you can when good comes your way
 - its impossible to understand God's ways

Questions and Observations

1) It looks to me that the teacher is telling us how the world is, and giving us practical advice on how best to live in those circumstances.
     - there is no meaning or purpose to life
     - life can be unjust
     - you can't really change this
     - so put up with the bad bits and enjoy the good bits
2) I expect you would think that it would be better to try and change the world, but is that practical in the culture where kings and force rule? 
3) I asked before about how this compares with "Imagine" before: Imagine tells us to imagine that the world is different to what it us and that will make if better. Pretty unrealistic I think. The teacher on the other hand tells us how he has found the world and how to live in the world that is.

I believe this is the essence:

16 When I applied my heart to know wisdom, and to see the business that is done on earth, how neither day nor night do one's eyes see sleep,
17 then I saw all the work of God, that man cannot find out the work that is done under the sun. However much man may toil in seeking, he will not find it out. Even though a wise man claims to know, he cannot find it out.

So many people reject God's Grace, and Faith, opting for intellectually understanding everything. According to God's Word, it can't be done. C. S. Lewis, a famous philosopher attempted to disprove God with his superior understanding, only to fail, and become a great believer!

These two verses says it all very simply.

Ecclesiastes 9 text

Highlights

 - do you're best but be ready for life to kick you where it hurts

Summary

 - No-one knows what sort of hand they're going to be dealt in life: this sucks
 - we're all going to die, but the living are better off than the dead.
 - so enjoy life while you have it: whatever you do, do you best
 - the best, the bravest, the most intelligent don't always win: all are subject to time and chance
 - once a poor wise man defeated a mighty knog and his army: but nobody remembered him
 - but wisdom is better than might: but one sinner can destroy much good

Questions and Observations

1) this guy should do a series of demotivational posters.

Quote from: ddickerson on Feb 19, 2017, 03:07PM C. S. Lewis, a famous philosopher attempted to disprove God with his superior understanding, only to fail, and become a great believer!

C. S. Lewis, a great writer and a "cradle Anglican," a believer his entire life, became more fervent in his later years.

Quote from: timothy42b on Feb 20, 2017, 05:31AMC. S. Lewis, a great writer and a "cradle Anglican," a believer his entire life, became more fervent in his later years.



Whoops, my error, he was raised Protestant, became Anglican later in life. 

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 18, 2017, 01:56PMfrom his PoV "under the sun" what is the point of trying to fix things when its all meaningless, vain.  What is his philosophical error?
A personal judgment. The writer seems to be discouraging people from trying to improve things that are wrong around them. Either you have free will and can affect this stuff (as you argue in the post I'm quoting here), or you don't.

The writer seems to say that, yes, we have free will, but it doesn't go very far in diverting the course of events. Which has profound truth in it, but simply declaring "h8ters gonna h8" is the reaction of someone that has let the vagaries of the world crush their spirits. John's correct to say that the book as a whole is not pessimistic, but sentiments like this veer perilously close to it. And when the speaker is purportedly the mighty king of a united Israel, he certainly does have it in his power to influence other people's behaviour strongly.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 18, 2017, 01:56PMv28 is his report on the data that he has.  Not misogyny just stats. His conclusion from the stats in v29 is that man has been created good but gone astray.  That's not misogyny.
"Misogyny" was too strong a word, meaning as it does "dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women". "Sexism", meaning "prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex", is be a better fit. Let's remind ourselves what was said:

Quote from: Ecclesiastes 7:25-2925 I turned my heart to know and to search out and to seek wisdom and the scheme of things, and to know the wickedness of folly and the foolishness that is madness. 26 And I find something more bitter than death: the woman whose heart is snares and nets, and whose hands are fetters. He who pleases God escapes her, but the sinner is taken by her. 27 Behold, this is what I found, says the Preacher, while adding one thing to another to find the scheme of things— 28 which my soul has sought repeatedly, but I have not found. One man among a thousand I found, but a woman among all these I have not found. 29 See, this alone I found, that God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes.
He firstly, apropos of nothing, out of nowhere, in v26 has a deep dig at women who seek to entrap men into romantic partnership (as if no man has ever behaved deceitfully towards a woman romantically...). Then, having crowbarred this theme in, in v28, he adds an observation that while some men in his observation reach the standards he praises, no women do. I infer that in this passage he's simply riffing on his personal idea that women aren't as good as men - two random put-downs in the same passage? I've seen this kind of faulty self-interested thinking too many times to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Women and men, we're all people, born with the same brains. He's speaking from a position of privilege - born into an exalted position, with the ability to study and reflect deeply, something effectively barred to the women of his acquaintance. The fact that he hasn't met a woman who meets his standards in these matters says a great deal more about the society he lived in than about women, about whom it basically says nothing.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 19, 2017, 12:23PMEcclesiastes 8 text

2) I expect you would think that it would be better to try and change the world, but is that practical in the culture where kings and force rule?
Two points:
1) When you're the king (as the author supposedly is!), you have the force in your hand. You can say "Oi! Bad guys! Stop it!" with some expectation that they will actually do so.
2) Are you saying that this biblical lesson is culture-dependent? That we can do better now than the author could hope to, so we should try more? You're a moderate and reasonable person, so you might well say this. But plenty of people hide behind the idea that biblical lessons are immutable and for all time and cultures. What do such people make of the idea that these texts might well have altered morals had they been written today?

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 19, 2017, 12:23PM3) I asked before about how this compares with "Imagine" before: Imagine tells us to imagine that the world is different to what it us and that will make if better. Pretty unrealistic I think. The teacher on the other hand tells us how he has found the world and how to live in the world that is.

"Imagine" is a pop song. It aims to sound profound without really trying to reach depths. It seems to me it's more about sparking thoughts than supplying life lessons.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 20, 2017, 01:41AMEcclesiastes 9 text

Highlights

 - do you're best but be ready for life to kick you where it hurts

Summary

 - No-one knows what sort of hand they're going to be dealt in life: this sucks
 - we're all going to die, but the living are better off than the dead.
 - so enjoy life while you have it: whatever you do, do you best
 - the best, the bravest, the most intelligent don't always win: all are subject to time and chance
 - once a poor wise man defeated a mighty knog and his army: but nobody remembered him
 - but wisdom is better than might: but one sinner can destroy much good

Questions and Observations

1) this guy should do a series of demotivational posters.

I like the honesty of it all. I find it interesting that the religious moral seems almost superfluous to the book, which reads like a self-help manual for people depressed about the state of the world. I don't doubt though that others see that emphasis differently. But the central moral of "Make yourself happy in making yourself and your bit of the world pleasant so far as you are permitted to - the rest is not under your control" is a valuable lesson for anyone. The stick/carrot of judgment and eventual reward is barely emphasised at all.

Quote from: timothy42b on Feb 20, 2017, 06:19AMWhoops, my error, he was raised Protestant, became Anglican later in life. 

Too bad somebody didn't bring up C. S. Lewis during the Psalms, because his work Reflections on the Psalms is quite interesting.  Here's a PDF online:
https://korycapps.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/cs-lewis-on-the-psalms.pdf

Lewis has become sort of a hero among the evangelical crowd because he did some apologetic writings that may have no more content than McDowell or Strobel but are written with much more skill.  His beliefs do not appear to match conservative US Christianity in the slightest, but he writes well. 

This is now off topic as we've moved on, but I'll quote one final paragraph from p. 38:

QuoteIt seems quite clear that in most parts of the Old Testament there is little or no belief in a future life, certainly no belief of any religious importance.  The word translated "soul" in our version of the Psalms simply means "life;" the word translated "hell" simply means "land of the dead," the state of all the dead, good and bad alike, Sheol.

Ecclesiastes 10 text

Highlights

 - Some more proverbs

Summary

 - It doesn't take much foolishness to spoil a lot of wisdom
 - It may not be in your interest to react to a slight
 - It's a topsy-turvy world
 - There are hidden dangers everywhere
 - Fools talk without purpose
 - Aristocracy should be dutiful
 - Do not curse those with power over you

Questions and Observations

1) This is a very proverby chapter.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 20, 2017, 07:16AMA personal judgment. The writer seems to be discouraging people from trying to improve things that are wrong around them. Either you have free will and can affect this stuff (as you argue in the post I'm quoting here), or you don't.

...

The writer seems to say that, yes, we have free will, but it doesn't go very far in diverting the course of events. Which has profound truth in it, but simply declaring "h8ters gonna h8" is the reaction of someone that has let the vagaries of the world crush their spirits. John's correct to say that the book as a whole is not pessimistic, but sentiments like this veer perilously close to it. And when the speaker is purportedly the mighty king of a united Israel, he certainly does have it in his power to influence other people's behaviour strongly.

I think that he's not saying that you can't change things in your lifetime, but that you have no control at all wbout what happens after you die and it only takes one fool or evil man to undo all your good work.  The history of Israel's kings is apropos.

Quote"Misogyny" was too strong a word, meaning as it does "dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women". "Sexism", meaning "prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex", is be a better fit. Let's remind ourselves what was said:

He firstly, apropos of nothing, out of nowhere, in v26 has a deep dig at women who seek to entrap men into romantic partnership (as if no man has ever behaved deceitfully towards a woman romantically...). Then, having crowbarred this theme in, in v28, he adds an observation that while some men in his observation reach the standards he praises, no women do. I infer that in this passage he's simply riffing on his personal idea that women aren't as good as men - two random put-downs in the same passage? I've seen this kind of faulty self-interested thinking too many times to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Women and men, we're all people, born with the same brains. He's speaking from a position of privilege - born into an exalted position, with the ability to study and reflect deeply, something effectively barred to the women of his acquaintance. The fact that he hasn't met a woman who meets his standards in these matters says a great deal more about the society he lived in than about women, about whom it basically says nothing.

I don't think his put downs are random though.  He shows that first men and then women are sinners, and then concludes that all was created upright but have "sought out many schemes"

Quote2) Are you saying that this biblical lesson is culture-dependent? That we can do better now than the author could hope to, so we should try more? You're a moderate and reasonable person, so you might well say this. But plenty of people hide behind the idea that biblical lessons are immutable and for all time and cultures. What do such people make of the idea that these texts might well have altered morals had they been written today?

its more complicated than that.
ISTM (and I'm making this up as I go because I haven't really got my ideas organised and its something that I should get more organised):
- the bible was written within cultures with those cultural idiosynchracies, but that it teaches "eternal" principles. 
- I think that these principles are constant, but their expression can be different
- We understand the bible we need to distinguish between principles and examples
- We often tend to assume our culture and issues and priorities when we read the bible and miss what its point is.

So in this case the Teacher is concerned to show that all man has gone astray not that women are worse than men.

Quote"Imagine" is a pop song. It aims to sound profound without really trying to reach depths. It seems to me it's more about sparking thoughts than supplying life lessons.

Unfortunately it is considered to be profound truth in parts of my society.

QuoteI like the honesty of it all. I find it interesting that the religious moral seems almost superfluous to the book, which reads like a self-help manual for people depressed about the state of the world. I don't doubt though that others see that emphasis differently. But the central moral of "Make yourself happy in making yourself and your bit of the world pleasant so far as you are permitted to - the rest is not under your control" is a valuable lesson for anyone. The stick/carrot of judgment and eventual reward is barely emphasised at all.

That's because the scope of the the Teacher's investigation and advice is based on what he has observed happening "under the sun"

Quote from: timothy42b on Feb 20, 2017, 06:19AMWhoops, my error, he was raised Protestant, became Anglican later in life. 

Tim, the Anglican Church is historically considered a Protestant church-- the 39 Articles have a moderate, but clear Protestant content.  That's why the official name of the American counterpart is The Protestant Episcopal Church.

I believe Lewis was raised in nominal Anglican home.  In what group of Anglicanism to categorize him is a bit difficult; he doesn't really fit in the evangelical or what is called the Anglo-Catholic wing and the Broad church wing was probably a bit too broad for him.  He never really identified with any of the historic wings of the Anglican tradition.

It's funny to see how the flow of history leads us...

King Henry VIII wanted to divorce his wife, but the Pope wouldn't let him. So he founded his own church that would let him do it, and hundreds of years later there are people all over the world choosing that worship tradition over the tradition he broke away from.

From ignominious beginnings do mighty things grow... It's not the only major religious tradition that we know started from a morally queasy place.

Ecclesiastes 11 text

Highlights

 - More proverbs around the central theme

Summary

 - What goes around comes around
 - There are larger patterns than human ones, that we are still subject to
 - But paying attention to human patterns within those patterns allows one to persist
 - Do not ration your preparations lest you gamble incorrectly with something vital
 - The light of the Sun is good, and we should enjoy it, remembering that we won't always be able to
 - Enjoy your youth, but do not become grumpy at the loss of it when you age

Questions and Observations

1) Somewhat cryptic, the opening verses. The first three summary points refer to the poetry section. I'm not convinced I've understood it completely correctly.
2) V5 is an example of a culture-dependent comparison. We have much greater understanding of how life grows from nothing in the womb these days.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 21, 2017, 02:54AMIt's funny to see how the flow of history leads us...

King Henry VIII wanted to divorce his wife, but the Pope wouldn't let him. So he founded his own church that would let him do it, and hundreds of years later there are people all over the world choosing that worship tradition over the tradition he broke away from.

From ignominious beginnings do mighty things grow... It's not the only major religious tradition that we know started from a morally queasy place.

To quote an old hymn: "God moves in mysterious ways."  Yes, Henry's lust and passion for a male heir helped spawn the Anglican tradition, but the religious climate was so volatile at that period in history, only hindsight can see any direction that would even remotely have looked certain at that time.  Considering that that the middle of the 16th century swung back and forth between the mildest forms of Protestantism-- Henry-- to a stornger Protestantism-- Edward--back to Roman Catholicism-- Mary- and then back to only a slightly more clear Protestantisim-- Elizabeth-- only to fight the same religious/political battles a century later during the Puritan era-demonstrates the volatile nature of the religious climate in Britain.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 21, 2017, 03:07AMEcclesiastes 11 text

Highlights

 - More proverbs around the central theme

Summary

 - What goes around comes around
 - There are larger patterns than human ones, that we are still subject to
 - But paying attention to human patterns within those patterns allows one to persist
 - Do not ration your preparations lest you gamble incorrectly with something vital
 - The light of the Sun is good, and we should enjoy it, remembering that we won't always be able to
 - Enjoy your youth, but do not become grumpy at the loss of it when you age

Questions and Observations

1) Somewhat cryptic, the opening verses. The first three summary points refer to the poetry section. I'm not convinced I've understood it completely correctly.

I agree its cryptic.  My guess would be
- the first two verses reinforce the same idea: that you don't know what disasters are going to befall you so give things to people so that (hopefully) they will help you when you need it.
- v4 and maybe v3 seem to me to be saying that things happen in their way, but if you spend all your time watching the ephemeral things like clouds or wind you will miss the opportunity to do important things that you need to do to survive.

Ecclesiastes 12 text

Highlights

 - Fear God because he knows everything and will judge you

Summary

 - Remember your creator when you're young and before you get old, weak and fearful and die
 - everything is vanity
 - the Preacher taught wise words of truth with great care
 - these words are to goad you to the right path: beware of other words
 - this is the end of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments

Questions and Observations

1) The writer is keen that we know that the Preacher words are reliable and that other writings are a waste of time.
2) his conclusion from the Preachers writings is that we need to fear God.  How did he get to this conclusion from what was written?

And that finishes Ecclesiastes. It's pleasant to have a couple of shorter books to deal with, after working through several marathons in a row.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 21, 2017, 05:50PMEcclesiastes 12 text

1) The writer is keen that we know that the Preacher words are reliable and that other writings are a waste of time.
How far does their condemnation stretch? Is it only Ecclesiastes that they think we should trust? Is Proverbs okay too? Any other works of Solomon? Works of other authors? Works from other traditions?

This is rather a narrow view - although I can see what they mean: not everyone has/had the luxury of time and ability to study multiple texts, and giving them one with a solid weight of practical life philosophy to it in preference to all others is a pretty decent choice to make.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 21, 2017, 05:50PM2) his conclusion from the Preachers writings is that we need to fear God.  How did he get to this conclusion from what was written?

Verses 1-8 make a neat literary wrap-up for the book, I think: "Woe, woe! Old age is coming, and you won't like it.", and then a reiteration of the book's opening line to finish.

But then he continues on for a few more words, the conclusion that you mention here. These last verses seem to be an editorial coda, reading as if the rest is a copy of an earlier work, with these final few verses being the editor's contextual comment. It is certainly stated a few times in the rest of the book's text that they see doing things for God as part of it, but, as I've commented already, it seems a detachable part of the message to me, a simple additional motivation added to the life lessons contained therein - does it also seem so to you? Which is perhaps why the editor saw fit to emphasise it above everything in this coda.

Quote from: MoominDave on Apr 06, 2016, 02:58PMPart I - The Tetrateuch
Genesis

• [li]Big picture stuff
  • [li]Creation; Adam & Eve[/li][li]Humans, take 1; Cain & Abel, Noah[/li][li]The Flood; Wash everything away, start again[/li][li]Humans, take 2[/li]
  [/li][li]Abraham; extensive travels, original covenant, Lot, not sacrificing Isaac[/li][li]Jacob; conflict with twin Esau, banishment, wives, 12 sons[/li][li]Joseph; betrayal to Egypt, rise, saving of family, supposed origins of 12 tribes[/li]

Exodus

• [li]New scene, three generations on - Israelites now of low status in Egypt[/li][li]Moses grows up, fights battle of wills with Pharoah over plagues, leads Israelites to depart[/li][li]Wandering, take 1; through the desert to Mt. Sinai, where they make a long camp and...[/li]

Leviticus

• [li]...many laws are given[/li]

Numbers

• [li]Wandering, take 2; they reach their destination, but are too weak to attempt the task, and so...[/li][li]Wandering, take 3; more pootling around, building up military prowess over the years in the preparation for invasion; new leaders emerge, and they finish on the brink of their destination again[/li]

Quote from: MoominDave on Jul 16, 2016, 04:49AMPart II - The Deuteronomistic History
Deuteronomy

• [li]Moses orates; recap of terms and conditions, forward planning[/li][li]Moses dies[/li]

Joshua

• [li]Conquest of Canaan under Joshua[/li][li]Division of conquered land between the tribes, East and West banks of the Jordan[/li]

Judges

• [li]Prologue: Messy details of attempted not-always-successful conquest, compare with previous book[/li][li]An intermittent sequence of Judges leads: Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar, Deborah, Gideon, Tola, Jair, Jephthah, Ibzan, Elon, Abdon, Samson[/li][li]The Dan tribe take territory in the North and the Benjamin tribe are defeated by the other tribes[/li]

Ruth

• [li]Intermezzo: Heartwarming tale of a family coming through hard times in the era of the Judges[/li]

1 Samuel

• [li]Samuel is a priestly leader in a time of Philistine conflicts who needs a worthy successor[/li][li]Saul is appointed to the new role of king and with his son Jonathan defeats the Ammonites, Philistines, Amalekites, but he falls out with Samuel, who anoints David as a replacement king secretly[/li][li]David (a military hero) and Saul vie for superiority over a long period, eventually brought to an end when the Philistines kill Saul in battle[/li]

2 Samuel

• [li]The kingdom nearly splits, but David unites it, doing many heroic deeds[/li][li]But in time he becomes morally suspect and manipulated by schemers[/li]

1 Kings

• [li]David dies, succeeded by Solomon, who consolidates his power base brutally but gains great wealth and a reputation for great wisdom, building the "first temple" and a palace; however, like David he becomes morally suspect in time[/li][li]After he dies, the kingdom is split into Israel (larger Northern portion) and Judah (smaller Southern portion), and the continual inference is that Judah is the legitimate one of the two[/li][li]Kings succeed in both Israel and Judah; Elijah gains prominence as a prophet[/li]

2 Kings

• [li]Long successions of kings of both Israel and Judah are described, and the prophet Elisha comes to prominence[/li][li]Most kings do not prioritise Yahweh-worship - none in Israel, but some in Judah.
  [/li][li]First Israel then Judah are unable to tread the difficult path of negotiation between stronger powers on either side, with both populations destroyed and exiled by 586 BC[/li]

Quote from: MoominDave on Oct 28, 2016, 07:11AMPart III - The Chronicler's History
1 Chronicles

• [li]Recap of genealogy to the beginning; return of some exiles to Judah[/li][li]Recap of Samuel written to favour David more highly[/li]

2 Chronicles

• [li]Recap of Kings with only the Judah parts and a focus on relations with Yahweh[/li][li]End of exile when Babylon falls[/li]

Ezra

• [li]Cyrus of Persia commands Judah to return home and rebuild their temple; decades later Artaxerxes of Persia commands Ezra to lead a second wave of returnees[/li]

Nehemiah

• [li]Nehemiah, a Judahite official of Artaxerxes of Persia, is appointed governor of Judah, rebuilding Jerusalem's wall; he and Ezra organise Judah, mixing enlightened social reform with brutally dogmatic interpretations of Mosaic law[/li]

Tobit Catholic/Orthodox

• [li]Tobit and his son Tobias are exiled in Nineveh when Israel falls, while Sarah lives in Media; a demon has killed seven of her husbands. With an angel's help, Tobias rescues her, and everyone lives happily ever after[/li]

Judith Catholic/Orthodox

• [li]Nebuchadnezzar is enraged by the Israelites' failure to answer a military summons, and despatches his general Holofernes with his army to suppress them; Judith, a beautiful Israelite widow, uses feminine wiles to distract Holofernes, killing him[/li]

Esther

• [li]Jewish exile in Susa Esther wins a beauty contest to become queen of Persia; factions vie to destroy the Jews in Persia, but the influence of her and her uncle Mordecai carries the day[/li]

1 Maccabees Catholic/Orthodox

• [li]In the 160s BC the Greek rulers attempt a religious crackdown in Judaea, against which Judas Maccabeus leads a rebellion[/li][li]Various competing empires trade blows, and all the while the rebellion becomes more secure; Jonathan Apphus and then Simon Thassi succeed Judas and establish a medium-term peace, along with Simon's dynasty, the Hasmonaeans[/li]

2 Maccabees  Catholic/Orthodox

• [li]Prior to the Maccabean revolt, unedifying political struggles within the priesthood result in turmoil, resulting in the crackdown of 1 Maccabees; Judas leads the first portion of his revolt, in less detail this time[/li]

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 13, 2017, 03:46AMPart IV - Wisdom Literature
Job

• [li]Job is a wealthy and good man, devoted to Yahweh[/li][li]Satan talks Yahweh into letting him test Job's faith, which he does by destroying his fortune, family, and health[/li][li]Job and his friends talk it over at length; Job is convinced of his innocence, his friends of his guilt[/li][li]Yahweh eventually turns up and ticks them all off for not respecting him enough; he restores Job's fortunes twice over[/li]

Psalms

• [li]Large collection of devotional songs/poems, whose themes include
  • [li]Overarching powerfulness of Yahweh[/li][li]Need to praise and thank Yahweh[/li][li]How bad it feels when Yahweh feels absent, and how good it feels when he feels present[/li]
  [/li]

Prayer of Manasseh Orthodox

• [li]An extra psalm[/li]

Proverbs

• [li]Large collection of wise sayings, many attributed to King Solomon. Major themes include:
  • [li]Industriousness, Humility, Fair dealing, Marital faithfulness, Religious devotion, Political savvy[/li]
  [/li]

Ecclesiastes

• [li]A harshly pragmatic sermon, attributed to Solomon, with the moral: All that one achieves will perish; the only true joy is to be taken in doing the tasks in front of you[/li]

Song of Solomon 1 text

Highlights

 - Solomon and his bride express their love and desire for each other through the medium of poetry

Summary

 - A woman keenly anticipates being taken into the king's chambers
 - Her acquaintances are happy for her
 - She confidently extols her beauty
 - Solomon and his bride tell each other how much they each love and desire the other

Questions and Observations

1) As Monty Python said: "And Now For Something Completely Different..." Perhaps a bit of light relief after the doom-laden tones of Ecclesiastes?
2) Who is the bride?
3) Who are the "others"?
4) Was being dark-skinned seen as unconventional at this time and place for a royal bride? The suggestion in the text seems to be that the deep tan that comes from working in the fields was not associated with being royal.
5) Would all women be happy to have their looks compared to a horse?
6) There are some very prudish people out there that are big fans of Christianity. I can only imagine that they haven't noticed this book.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 22, 2017, 02:42AMAnd that finishes Ecclesiastes. It's pleasant to have a couple of shorter books to deal with, after working through several marathons in a row.

How far does their condemnation stretch? Is it only Ecclesiastes that they think we should trust? Is Proverbs okay too? Any other works of Solomon? Works of other authors? Works from other traditions?
 
This is rather a narrow view - although I can see what they mean: not everyone has/had the luxury of time and ability to study multiple texts, and giving them one with a solid weight of practical life philosophy to it in preference to all others is a pretty decent choice to make.

I wouldn't think that he is critiquing what would have been accepted parts of the Hebrew scripture, but can't think of any specific evidence.

QuoteVerses 1-8 make a neat literary wrap-up for the book, I think: "Woe, woe! Old age is coming, and you won't like it.", and then a reiteration of the book's opening line to finish.

But then he continues on for a few more words, the conclusion that you mention here. These last verses seem to be an editorial coda, reading as if the rest is a copy of an earlier work, with these final few verses being the editor's contextual comment. It is certainly stated a few times in the rest of the book's text that they see doing things for God as part of it, but, as I've commented already, it seems a detachable part of the message to me, a simple additional motivation added to the life lessons contained therein - does it also seem so to you? Which is perhaps why the editor saw fit to emphasise it above everything in this coda.

It definitely sounds like the words of an editor.

I think that he sees the words of the teacher as showing that life under the sun is filled with chance and unfairness and is as certain as the wind and that the only hope of any reliable hope is in God.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 22, 2017, 03:13AM...

1) As Monty Python said: "And Now For Something Completely Different..." Perhaps a bit of light relief after the doom-laden tones of Ecclesiastes?

an inspired placement in the sequence of books isn't it

Quote2) Who is the bride?
3) Who are the "others"?

I don't know who the bride is.

I guess the others are young women in the palace.  Who do you think they are making the baubles for, him or her?

Quote4) Was being dark-skinned seen as unconventional at this time and place for a royal bride? The suggestion in the text seems to be that the deep tan that comes from working in the fields was not associated with being royal.

I think that's right

Quote5) Would all women be happy to have their looks compared to a horse?

try it with your bride and let me know how you go

And there are more interesting comparisons coming

Quote6) There are some very prudish people out there that are big fans of Christianity. I can only imagine that they haven't noticed this book.

That's for sure.  We had a series on it a few years ago, but that's the only time I've heard it preached on.

Song of Solomon 2 text

Highlights

 - Solomon and bride continue their expressions of fondness

Summary

 - Her: I am beautiful
 - Him: More beautiful than other women
 - Her: I admire you greatly. You sustain and protect me. You too are beautiful; also agile, graceful, skillful.

Questions and Observations

1) Strange to break the previous chapter in the middle of a speech
2) I'm a bit curious - what are the theological arguments for the inclusion of this material in the Christian bible?

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 22, 2017, 09:19AM
2) I'm a bit curious - what are the theological arguments for the inclusion of this material in the Christian bible?

According to this:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionqanda/2014/08/why-is-the-song-of-solomon-in-the-bible/
nobody knows.  Certainly not I.  I'd be interested in any ideas. 

Quote from: timothy42b on Feb 22, 2017, 12:58PMAccording to this:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionqanda/2014/08/why-is-the-song-of-solomon-in-the-bible/
nobody knows.  Certainly not I.  I'd be interested in any ideas. 

It probably depends on how you interpret it.  Most commentators, including those of a conservative stripe today, seem to argue that it is there to show the beauty of marital love.  Older commentators-- both Jewish and Christian-- often interpreted it allegorically-- a typological description of the relationship between Christ and the church of between God and Israel.  There have been some attempts to blend the 2.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 22, 2017, 09:19AMSong of Solomon 2 text

...

1) Strange to break the previous chapter in the middle of a speech

maybe the guy that put the chapter breaks in thought that the last verses of ch1 were spoken by the groom

Quote2) I'm a bit curious - what are the theological arguments for the inclusion of this material in the Christian bible?

Its easy for me: God wanted it in.

I am curious how he got people to put it in.

As John mentioned there have been different ways of interpreting SoS of the years.  This ref has a fairly comprehensive discussion on that.  https://bible.org/seriespage/29-song-songs

I can't see why it can't be read on multiple levels:
1. about a bride and her groom, talking about their love for each other, but probably teaching about love in marriage or extolling virtuousness
2. possibly also typologically about christ and the church aka Ephesians 6

I can think of some reasons why 2 is unlikely in the light of Eph 6 though.

PS: Have you tried telling your beloved that she reminds you of a horse yet? We're eagerly awaiting the results of your experiment

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 22, 2017, 02:23PMAs John mentioned there have been different ways of interpreting SoS of the years.  This ref has a fairly comprehensive discussion on that.  https://bible.org/seriespage/29-song-songs
Glad it's not just me that's reading in a certain amount of perplexity...

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 22, 2017, 02:23PMI can't see why it can't be read on multiple levels:
1. about a bride and her groom, talking about their love for each other, but probably teaching about love in marriage or extolling virtuousness
2. possibly also typologically about christ and the church aka Ephesians 6

I can think of some reasons why 2 is unlikely in the light of Eph 6 though.
My inclination thus far is certainly to read it literally. The desire to make it an allegory, as your link says, solves the problem of its inclusion in the canon while easing the consciences of those troubled by sexual literary expression, but is not very compelling otherwise. I'm intrigued by the spoilers in your link that say that it can be literally read as a love triangle - the opening speech of chapter 1 had an odd and rather enigmatic flavour about it that could more sensibly be read as the woman stealing a last kiss with her real beloved before the king took her away. And then, reading on, it casts it all in quite a different flavour if "He" is not the king, but this other party. Puzzling stuff, so far.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 22, 2017, 02:23PMPS: Have you tried telling your beloved that she reminds you of a horse yet? We're eagerly awaiting the results of your experiment

I was intending to collect some further blandishments from this text to add to it, to try them out in sequence. But if you want results now, I will beguile her with this one tonight. Watch this space. And if I should fail to return, do not mourn me - I died in a noble cause.

Will you do the same? Or indeed will anyone else with a suitable receptacle for such compliments? We could build a dataset...

Song of Solomon 3 text

Highlights

 - He and her enjoy (possibly non-real) snuggle time
 - Solomon arrives

Summary

 - The woman misses her lover; she wanders the city by night seeking him
 - She finds him, and takes him back to her mother's house
 - King Solomon arrives from outside the city, carried in pomp and splendour

Questions and Observations

1) The ESV heading is "The Bride's Dream", but there's no indication that this is not meant literally.
2) V5: "I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem,
    by the gazelles or the does of the field,
that you not stir up or awaken love
    until it pleases."
I don't understand this. Presumably the injunction is to not force falling in love to occur before it happens naturally, which strikes me as good advice, but why is it relevant here?
3) I'm starting to think that the point of this book may be as an illustration of the proverbs that explicitly tell you not to mess with the king. The woman has a beloved (in the love triangle hypothesis, which does so far read more naturally than the simple marriage hypothesis), but the king selects her. The king wants, the king gets, that's the way of the world, as ordained divinely. Do not argue with his wishes; he is too powerful and divinely backed up.
4) The bride finds her beloved in the city, then Solomon arrives from the wilderness. It is starting to feel quite a stretch to conceive that these two are the same person. This I suppose is the reason for the "dream" heading, which strikes me as a bit contrived ('She woke up, and it had all been a dream...').
5) Jumping ahead (spoilers!), I see that the woman is described as as a "Shulammite" i.e. one from Shulam. But no such place is identified. Could she be intended to be Abishag the Shunammite, who was sent in to keep King David's bed warm in the infirmity of his old age, and whose subsequent marital prospects caused Solomon to have his brother Adonijah killed?

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 22, 2017, 02:23PM

PS: Have you tried telling your beloved that she reminds you of a horse yet? We're eagerly awaiting the results of your experiment

No, but I have told her on Valentine's day that her teeth looked like a flock of sheep newly shorn.  We always get a laugh out of that since it doesn't fly the same in our culture.

Quote from: John the Theologian on Feb 23, 2017, 01:12PMNo, but I have told her on Valentine's day that her teeth looked like a flock of sheep newly shorn.  We always get a laugh out of that since it doesn't fly the same in our culture.

The results are in...

Scene: Idle domestic tranquillity, Diane and I watching an episode from "Once Upon a Time" Season 1 on the sofa before heading out to a brass band rehearsal. Diane pauses the programme in order to fetch supper from the oven.

Me: "Oh, hang on, I promised bible-reading Martin I'd try something with you"
Diane: <raises eyebrows>
Me: <fiddling with her Ipad for the text> "Hang on, where is it... Ah yes... I compare you, my love, to a mare among Pharaoh's chariots."
Diane: <raises eyebrows further, purses mouth, looks generally puzzled>
<pause for reaction, in which nothing happens>
Me: "Do you like being compared to a horse?"
Diane: "Oh, I thought 'mare' was 'nightmare'!"

Song of Solomon 4 text

Highlights

 - The male protagonist is in no way frightened of using some rather strange and potentially off-putting similes to describe his admiration of the female protagonist

Summary

 - He says:
  - Her eyes, hair, teeth, breasts are like particular animals
  - Her lips are like a scarlet thread
  - Her neck is like a stone tower
 - He urges her to come with him from Lebanon
 - He talks of his need for her, and his joy in her appreciation of him
 - He praises her smell and taste
 - She briefly talks also, in a couplet that surely belongs more in the next chapter than this one?

Questions and Observations

1) Okay, we're into the silly bit now... I tried some of these on Diane as well, which did not decrease the amount of nonplussedness in the room. She, like me, rather enjoyed the idea that there's a book of vaguely erotic poetry in the middle of the bible, no-one quite knowing why.
2) I really really wouldn't compliment a woman by saying that her neck was like a tower on which the shields of a thousand warriors have been hung... It sounds like more like a snide jibe at her promiscuity than anything else...
3) Can we infer from v8 that the woman is from Lebanon? Amana is in modern-day Turkey - perhaps part of Lebanon back then? But then the date of writing is particularly unclear for this book. Much later than Solomon is about all we know.
4) Again, the chapter division seems rather wrong.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 24, 2017, 02:06AMThe results are in...

Scene: Idle domestic tranquillity, Diane and I watching an episode from "Once Upon a Time" Season 1 on the sofa before heading out to a brass band rehearsal. Diane pauses the programme in order to fetch supper from the oven.

Me: "Oh, hang on, I promised bible-reading Martin I'd try something with you"
Diane: <raises eyebrows>
Me: <fiddling with her Ipad for the text> "Hang on, where is it... Ah yes... I compare you, my love, to a mare among Pharaoh's chariots."
Diane: <raises eyebrows further, purses mouth, looks generally puzzled>
<pause for reaction, in which nothing happens>
Me: "Do you like being compared to a horse?"
Diane: "Oh, I thought 'mare' was 'nightmare'!"

My wife just rolled her horsey eyes and neighed.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 24, 2017, 08:47AMSong of Solomon 4 text
...

3) Can we infer from v8 that the woman is from Lebanon? Amana is in modern-day Turkey - perhaps part of Lebanon back then? But then the date of writing is particularly unclear for this book. Much later than Solomon is about all we know.

sounds fair enough

Quote4) Again, the chapter division seems rather wrong.

I think that it should actually be after v1 in the next chapter. Ch4 and 5:1 seem to be describing the wedding night poetically.  Enjoying the yummy food in the garden sounds metaphoric.

Song of Solomon 5 text

Highlights

 - timing is important

Summary

 - the groom tells how he enjoyed the yummy food with his bride
 - the others encourage them

 - He comes home from work late and knocks on her bedroom door
 - At first she's more concerned about having to get dressed and not getting her feet soiled,
 - but soon her passion is aroused and she opens the door to let her lover in, but alas! he had gone
 - she frantically searches the palace for him and the watchmen beat her
 - she pleads with the others to search for her beloved and to tell him that she is sick with love for him
 - they say "what's so great about him?" and she tells him how handsome he his, "sigh"

Questions and Observations

1) I think the first verse goes with the wedding night described in ch4 and the rest of ch5 is another night, after the honeymoon is over, and the relationship is as easy as it was

2) So why is this in the bible?  Cause God made man and woman, and gave us sex and romance and some of us puritans need to be reassured that they are kosher and good.  IMHO

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 25, 2017, 01:45AMSong of Solomon 5 text
Questions and Observations

2) So why is this in the bible?  Cause God made man and woman, and gave us sex and romance and some of us puritans need to be reassured that they are kosher and good.  IMHO

Song of Solomon 6 text

Highlights

 - She is more beautiful than any other woman in the Kings harem

Summary

 - where has your beloved gone? He's gone to his garden: he is mine!
 - The groom tells his bride is the most beautiful, she is even praised by the rest of his harem
 - She goes down to the orchard and before she knows it her desire brings her to a prince
 - the others call her home, but the groom asks why they should look on her

Questions and Observations

1) I think that the first 3 verses completes the conversation in the previous chapter.
2) The groom is a king with a large harem! Not the ideal christian husband who devotedly loves his one wife.  So it looks to me as SoS is not about true love between husband and wife.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 25, 2017, 01:45AMSong of Solomon 5 text

1) I think the first verse goes with the wedding night described in ch4 and the rest of ch5 is another night, after the honeymoon is over, and the relationship is as easy as it was
Yes, I think that it's clear that v1 belongs with the final verse of the previous chapter. See comment below (and various comments above) on assumption of wedding night etc.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 25, 2017, 01:45AM2) So why is this in the bible?  Cause God made man and woman, and gave us sex and romance and some of us puritans need to be reassured that they are kosher and good.  IMHO

Sounds like a nice and reasonable idea!

More generally, this summary is returning to the 'authorised' interpretation, where 'He' is Solomon. But, leaving aside the headings (which are presumably a later insert? Do we know about these?), there's no indication in the text that Solomon talks at all in this book. It's all context and assumption. Why would the queen be mistreated by watchmen, wandering the city at night looking for the king? It seems strange, and more naturally explained by 'He' being a third party. The 'Others' do not talk as if her beloved is the king either - it would be obvious to them what qualities he had if so.

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 26, 2017, 06:21PMSong of Solomon 6 text

 - She goes down to the orchard and before she knows it her desire brings her to a prince
"A kinsman" - this seems an important detail? Someone who bears her affection and loyalty. Is the prince about to play a part?

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 26, 2017, 06:21PM - the others call her home, but the groom asks why they should look on her
Or are they urging her to return to her original home?

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 26, 2017, 06:21PM1) I think that the first 3 verses completes the conversation in the previous chapter.
Yes, I think this is correct. Literary device, or damage in transmission?

Quote from: drizabone on Feb 26, 2017, 06:21PM2) The groom is a king with a large harem! Not the ideal christian husband who devotedly loves his one wife.  So it looks to me as SoS is not about true love between husband and wife.

Or (cf. above) it is about true love, in an unmarried state, with the king getting in the way of it.

Song of Solomon 7 text

Highlights

 - Anticipation is sweet

Summary

 - He: She is captivatingly beautiful, and he looks forward to knowing her body
 - She: 'Me too!'
 - She: 'Let's go out into rural settings and make this happen'

Questions and Observations

1) V5: "A king is held captive in the tresses". Either this is Solomon describing himself in her thrall, or her other beloved noting the same.
2) V8 is starting to get a little hot and heavy.
3) Why would she take the king out into villages and vineyards to make love to him? He has a whole palace for the purpose, well accustomed to his carnal ways. Once again I'm drawn to seeing the triangle interpretation as making more sense.
4) But it must be admitted that the flow of the poem seems rather mangled in places. It reads like a text that's been chopped up and put back together in a different order, with some crucial material lost. Hence the general confusion of interpretation.
5) No, the kinsman prince seems to have disappeared. Unless... Could he be her beloved? It wasn't uncommon for this culture to cousin-marry. There seems no point to his appearance otherwise.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 27, 2017, 06:25AMSong of Solomon 7 text

...

3) Why would she take the king out into villages and vineyards to make love to him? He has a whole palace for the purpose, well accustomed to his carnal ways. Once again I'm drawn to seeing the triangle interpretation as making more sense.

she was a country girl so maybe that was more comfortable for her, or she thought it was more romantic, or the mandrakes were more potent and fresh

Quote4) But it must be admitted that the flow of the poem seems rather mangled in places. It reads like a text that's been chopped up and put back together in a different order, with some crucial material lost. Hence the general confusion of interpretation.

or written to suggest the passion and heat of the moment without actually mentioning the naughty bits.

Quote5) No, the kinsman prince seems to have disappeared. Unless... Could he be her beloved? It wasn't uncommon for this culture to cousin-marry. There seems no point to his appearance otherwise.

its interesting isn't it.  the alternate translation suggested in the ESV notes avoids the issue though.

And the NIV thinks that this paragraph is spoken by the king and offers the following alternate translations for 6:12  "Or among the chariots of Amminadab; or among the chariots of the people of the prince"

Song of Solomon 8 text

Highlights

 - Wrapping up (or not)

Summary

 - She, of her beloved: Fond sentiments
 - She: Love is immensely powerful
 - Others: Advise us on how to approach future love for our pre-pubescent sister
 - She: Things turned out okay for me
 - She: Comparison between Solomon's vineyard and herself
 - He: "O you who dwell in the gardens, with companions listening for your voice; let me hear it."
 - She: Be quick, my beloved

Questions and Observations

1) V4 is repeated from earlier in the book:
"I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem,
    that you not stir up or awaken love
    until it pleases."
I still don't feel that I really understand what it means or why the writer felt it a useful sentiment to add in the several places it is repeated in this book.
2) To wish that your beloved were "like a brother to me to me who nursed at my mother's breasts!". Bit of a strange sentiment.
3) V5 is cryptic. I don't think it can be intended to be the woman's words, as it talks about her. Perhaps the "Others". But it can't be - the next sentence would make no sense in the mouths of either Others or She:
 "Under the apple tree I awakened you.
There your mother was in labor with you;
    there she who bore you was in labor."
Are these supposed to be the words of Yahweh? Of her mother? Of her beloved? Of Solomon? This leaves many more puzzles than it answers.
4) Vv 8-9 are an interjection which seems a non sequitur:

"Others

8
We have a little sister,
    and she has no breasts.
What shall we do for our sister
    on the day when she is spoken for?
9
If she is a wall,
    we will build on her a battlement of silver,
but if she is a door,
    we will enclose her with boards of cedar."

The metaphors make little sense to me - do they refer to willingness to consider suitors? And why are they asking this question at all? It adds nothing and spoils the poetic flow. V10 on its own I think is the answer to this, although there is no separation in the text between verses 10 and 11:

"She

10
I was a wall,
    and my breasts were like towers;
then I was in his eyes
    as one who finds peace."

This seems no kind of useful answer to the question. 'I was different to your little sister, and this happened to me, in the most general possible terms.'

5) The comparison with Solomon's vineyard is intriguing. Is she comparing her literal vineyard or her own self, metaphorically? And what's this about giving the king most, but also giving some to the keeper? Is this the third party, the beloved?
6) The male interjection in v13 (reproduced whole in the summary as its purpose is mysterious to me) is puzzling. Is the women the garden-dweller? Who are her companions? Who is talking? Is it Solomon, who has mislaid his bride? Is it the beloved, mourning his loss to Solomon? Puzzle puzzle puzzle...
7) Then what is she urging in the final (cryptic, needless to say) verse? Is she urging her beloved to escape while Solomon calls to her to come? Is she urging him to take her away with him? Is she urging Solomon to come to her quickly?
8) It's interesting that in v11 Solomon has a vineyard at a place dedicated to Ba'al.
9) All in all, this final chapter takes a book whose purpose was already decidedly obscure and wraps it in a veil of mist. The narrative of this chapter is very choppy, and seems to make little sense - it feels most of any parts of this book like a salad of poetic verses, arranged in random order. In trying to deduce meaning from it, I have the uneasy feeling that there was simply no meaning in it as arranged in the first place. Perhaps it has reached us in substantially garbled form?
10) So how do I leave this book? I lean towards the idea that it describes a woman torn between her lover and her king's command to join him; it simply fits the words better to my eyes than reading it as a simple celebration of Solomon's marriage to her, an interpretation which requires a fair degree of skimming over things to make fit. But it doesn't fit any interpretation that I've seen or thought of perfectly. What would I guess? That it was originally a coherent piece of poetry (or poetic tradition) describing said love triangle that became notably garbled in transmission prior to the date of writing down - perhaps multiple competing versions were in currency, and the editor chose to include all available pieces, at the expense of the narrative. What is certain of it is not much, but I don't think one could argue that it shows at least one passionate love between two people, expressed in tender terms. There's beauty and humanity in the text, but it is very flawed.
11) In consequence, its purpose in the canon is rather confusing. Everyone has their favoured theory, it seems. How did it become canonical in the first place? It is apparently of unusually late date.
12) I'll leave the thread for people to add their comment on this most debatable book for now, rather than jumping in with the first chapter of the next book. Note that, as we are including the deuterocanonical books found in the Catholic text, the next book is not Isaiah, as would be in the Protestant scheme, but Wisdom. Deuterocanonical books thus far (Tobit, which strained credulity on supernatural grounds; Judith, which strained it on historical grounds; 1 Maccabees, which was a dense and rich retelling of historical material; 2 Maccabees, which was a rather weak and childish retelling of material that overlapped with 1 Maccabees) have been a mixed bag overall. Previewing these next two (Wisdom and Sirach), they look like extensions of the Proverbs more than anything else - I hope they'll be enjoyable.

Quote from: MoominDave on Feb 28, 2017, 06:36AMSong of Solomon 8 text

...

1) V4 is repeated from earlier in the book:
"I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem,
    that you not stir up or awaken love
    until it pleases."
I still don't feel that I really understand what it means or why the writer felt it a useful sentiment to add in the several places it is repeated in this book.

I'm not sure either, but it seems to be saying that you should keep love for the right time, so I'm changing "pleases" to "appropriate" to make sense of it.  But I'd be surprised if that's right

Quote2) To wish that your beloved were "like a brother to me to me who nursed at my mother's breasts!". Bit of a strange sentiment.

I think that in that society public affection between a husband and wife were frowned on, but sibling affection was ok.  So she's saying that she wishes that she could kiss him in public without anyone despising her.

Quote3) V5 is cryptic. I don't think it can be intended to be the woman's words, as it talks about her. Perhaps the "Others". But it can't be - the next sentence would make no sense in the mouths of either Others or She:
 "Under the apple tree I awakened you.
There your mother was in labor with you;
    there she who bore you was in labor."
Are these supposed to be the words of Yahweh? Of her mother? Of her beloved? Of Solomon? This leaves many more puzzles than it answers.

I guess that v5 is either the others speaking, or her being rhetorical.  Then she describes her love: how strong and fierce it is, how it can't be quenched and how anyone that thinks it can be bought is despicable.

This seems to be the high point of the chapter for her.

Quote4) Vv 8-9 are an interjection which seems a non sequitur:

"Others

8
We have a little sister,
    and she has no breasts.
What shall we do for our sister
    on the day when she is spoken for?
9
If she is a wall,
    we will build on her a battlement of silver,
but if she is a door,
    we will enclose her with boards of cedar."

The metaphors make little sense to me - do they refer to willingness to consider suitors? And why are they asking this question at all? It adds nothing and spoils the poetic flow. V10 on its own I think is the answer to this, although there is no separation in the text between verses 10 and 11:

"She

10
I was a wall,
    and my breasts were like towers;
then I was in his eyes
    as one who finds peace."

This seems no kind of useful answer to the question. 'I was different to your little sister, and this happened to me, in the most general possible terms.'

What question do you think is being answered? v5?  I think we've changed topic from v5 and she/the author is not giving advice on keeping the expression of love to the right time and her response to having done that follows in v10

Quote5) The comparison with Solomon's vineyard is intriguing. Is she comparing her literal vineyard or her own self, metaphorically? And what's this about giving the king most, but also giving some to the keeper? Is this the third party, the beloved?

I think that she is making an analogy between Solomons renting out his vineyard and how she thinks love should be given.  Solomon let out his vineyard as a commercial venture with the 1000 going to Solomon and 200 to the keepers, she is not offering her vineyard (ie her love) for money, it is hers to give as she wants.

So this is the same idea as she mentioned in v7, that love is not something that should be bought, anyone who tries should be ridiculed.  I guess that this is in a culture where marriages are arranged by a family for economic reasons

Quote6) The male interjection in v13 (reproduced whole in the summary as its purpose is mysterious to me) is puzzling. Is the women the garden-dweller? Who are her companions? Who is talking? Is it Solomon, who has mislaid his bride? Is it the beloved, mourning his loss to Solomon? Puzzle puzzle puzzle...
7) Then what is she urging in the final (cryptic, needless to say) verse? Is she urging her beloved to escape while Solomon calls to her to come? Is she urging him to take her away with him? Is she urging Solomon to come to her quickly?

I think the writer is just leaving us with the impression of the strong love/desire between the 2.  He wants to hear her voice and she wants him to come to her quickly.
Quote8) It's interesting that in v11 Solomon has a vineyard at a place dedicated to Ba'al.

it was just a name

Quote9) All in all, this final chapter takes a book whose purpose was already decidedly obscure and wraps it in a veil of mist. The narrative of this chapter is very choppy, and seems to make little sense - it feels most of any parts of this book like a salad of poetic verses, arranged in random order. In trying to deduce meaning from it, I have the uneasy feeling that there was simply no meaning in it as arranged in the first place. Perhaps it has reached us in substantially garbled form?
10) So how do I leave this book? I lean towards the idea that it describes a woman torn between her lover and her king's command to join him; it simply fits the words better to my eyes than reading it as a simple celebration of Solomon's marriage to her, an interpretation which requires a fair degree of skimming over things to make fit. But it doesn't fit any interpretation that I've seen or thought of perfectly. What would I guess? That it was originally a coherent piece of poetry (or poetic tradition) describing said love triangle that became notably garbled in transmission prior to the date of writing down - perhaps multiple competing versions were in currency, and the editor chose to include all available pieces, at the expense of the narrative. What is certain of it is not much, but I don't think one could argue that it shows at least one passionate love between two people, expressed in tender terms. There's beauty and humanity in the text, but it is very flawed.

its not an organised sequential narrative is it.  I think its organisation is based around the topics that the writer wanted to discuss.  There may be an order the the topics but I can't be sure.

But it leaves lots of questions and its understandable that its not preached on much.

I think the purpose of the book is to give us a poetic story that tells that "true love" and virtue are important and should be valued and respected.

Wisdom 1 text

Highlights

 - by upright and wise

Summary

 - love righteousness so that you can stay close to God and wisdom
 - wisdom will help you but won't keep you from God's judgement
 - so don't be foolish and grumble or invite death by your bad works
 - righteousness is immortal but the ungodly summon death

Questions and Observations

1) Wisdom is thought to have been written from Alexandria around 25BC in the time of persecution of the Jews.  It's purpose was to encourage Jews to be faithful.  see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Wisdom where I did my in depth research.
2) Wisdom teaches the possibility of immortality!  I'm not sure if this is going to be similar to the eternal life of the NT or afterlife.
3) I am keen to see how this compares to Proverbs and Ecclesiastes