Tag Archives: folly

Notes On Ecclesiastes 2:1-17.5

08 Tuesday May 2012

Posted by in Ecclesiastes, Psalms

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

What are the advantages of wisdom over folly?

Though wisdom’s advantages are only temporary, still, for Qoheleth, they are real. The bandages to wisdom have been the implicit and explicit assumption to this point, though their temporary us has now proven disenchanting. Most commentators rushed to admit the “relative” words of wisdom, yet Qoheleth speaks unequivocally about its absolute value over folly…. But rather than wisdom simply being relatively better than folly, Qoheleth asserts their differences are like night and day. Later, and 10:2, he says they are as opposite as right and left (Fredricks, 95).

To better understand the value of wisdom being “light” and “eyes in one’s head” consider:

18 But the path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, which shines brighter and brighter until full day. 19 The way of the wicked is like deep darkness; they do not know over what they stumble. Proverbs 4:18–19 (ESV)

The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it. Proverbs 22:3 (ESV)

Whoever walks with the wise becomes wise, but the companion of fools will suffer harm. Proverbs 13:20 (ESV)

Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path. Psalm 119:105 (ESV)

For the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life, Proverbs 6:23 (ESV)

They grope in the dark without light, and he makes them stagger like a drunken man. Job 12:25 (ESV)

Murphy writes of this passage:

What credence does Qoheleth give to the “advantage” (יתרון yitrôn) of wisdom? He ranks it over folly (cf. 2:3, 9), which is never a viable option for him. But it is clear that v 14b modifies the saying in v 14a about the superiority of wisdom. Qoheleth is not to be described as “anti-wisdom,” but he is its severest critic; after all, he tried to attain wisdom, and he acknowledged failure in 7:23–24.[1]

[1] Roland Murphy, vol. 23A, Word Biblical Commentary : Ecclesiates, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2002), 22.

Notes On Ecclesiastes 2:1-17.4

07 Monday May 2012

Posted by in Ecclesiastes

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

What can a man do (v. 12b)?

Well, what can someone do who does come after the king?[1] We have read what Solomon has done: is there anything which one can do?

This is again one of the questions which Qoheleth asks but he does not immediately answer. Here is a typical sort of answer supplied by the commentators:

He then claims that his, the king’s efforts, cannot be superseded by anyone who follows him, the implication being that if he cannot find meaning or significance here, then no one can (Longman, 95-96).

Is that true? Consider the words carefully.

Did Solomon say that there was no meaning of significance? Did he provide any answers to his question?

Is that good or bad?

If he can’t find significance, does that mean that it does not exist?

[1] Verse 12b, however, is extraordinarily difficult. The NIV (“What more … been done?”) is quite paraphrastic and depends on emending the text.42 Its apparent meaning is that no subsequent king could possibly do more to investigate wisdom and folly than Solomon. This reading is more or less followed by most modern interpreters.43 This interpretation, however, is strangely out of place in this context and involves significant alterations or peculiar translations of the text.44

Fox emends to obtain a different interpretation: the “king” is concerned about whether his successor will be a fool who wastes all that was earned for him.45 In light of 2:18–19 this solution to the text is reasonable, but it does involve considerable emendation of the text.

Ancient interpreters, however, saw the text quite differently. The Septuagint takes “king” to refer to wise counsel,46 which no one adequately follows. The Vulgate understands the “king” to be God, while the Targum reads the verse to mean that no one need attempt to reverse a royal decree after it has been executed.47

If the Hebrew is to be interpreted as it stands, the line can be translated literally as, “What is the man who will come after the king whom they have already made?”48 This would seem to make no sense. One could take “made” to mean “crowned,” but this is not the idiom one would expect.49

The phrase, “What is the man?” however, is analogous to the familiar “What is man?” question in Pss 8:4; 144:3; Job 7:17. The word “man” (ʾādām), moreover, is a catchword in Ecclesiastes for the human as a child of Adam. It represents all the folly, mortality, futility, and evil that humanity has inherited. From this one may hypothesize that “the king” refers to none other than “Adam” of Gen 2–4. The term “king” may have been chosen because “What is the ʾādām who will come after ʾādām” was unsatisfactory. Also the ʾādām of Gen 2–3 is in reality the king of humanity.

The Hebrew phrase “whom they have already made” would then refer to the divine creation of Adam. The plural may seem troubling, but three interpretations are possible. The plural may be a corruption; a number of Hebrew manuscripts read a singular verb here. The general plural may represent a passive; the translations would then be, “Who has already been made.”50 More likely the plural is in direct imitation of the plural verb in Gen 1:26.51 The meaning of the line can be paraphrased, “Is a human likely to come along who will be better than the king—Adam—whom God made long ago?”

In context this line states that there is little chance that humans will behave with greater wisdom than their first ancestor, Adam, who came directly from the hand of God. The apple does not fall far from the tree. The Teacher cannot confine his investigation to wisdom; he must also understand folly, for that is the stuff of human nature.

Duane A. Garrett, vol. 14, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001), 293-94.

Notes On Ecclesiastes 2:1-17.3

06 Sunday May 2012

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Ecclesiastes, Jeremiah

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Ecclesiastes 2:12-17:

12 So I turned to consider wisdom and madness and folly. For what can the man do who comes after the king? Only what has already been done. 13 Then I saw that there is more gain in wisdom than in folly, as there is more gain in light than in darkness. 14 The wise person has his eyes in his head, but the fool walks in darkness. And yet I perceived that the same event happens to all of them. 15 Then I said in my heart, “What happens to the fool will happen to me also. Why then have I been so very wise?” And I said in my heart that this also is vanity. 16 For of the wise as of the fool there is no enduring remembrance, seeing that in the days to come all will have been long forgotten. How the wise dies just like the fool! 17 So I hated life, because what is done under the sun was grievous to me, for all is vanity and a striving after wind. Ecclesiastes 2:12–17 (ESV)

The question of translation: Verse 12 has several potential translation problems:

….to consider wisdom and madness and folly

                                wisdom which is madness and folly

                                wisdom and madness [irrationality]which is folly

The answer to this question depends upon what we understand Solomon to be considering.  The first is the easiest translation into English. The problem is that Solomon does not immediately discuss “madness” after this statement. The second translation is possible; yet, Solomon does thereafter consider folly/foolishness and fools. Therefore, it does seem best to consider both topics. The third translation is perhaps best:

1.       The context is as to both wisdom & folly.

2.       The punctuation (which you can’t see in the English Bible) organizes wisdom on one side and madness/folly on the other side.

3.       Madness and folly are closely related concepts: Eccl. 1:17 (7:7, potentially by context), 7:25 & 10:13.

Thus, Solomon has turned to consider wisdom and irrationality/foolishness.  The precise word used for “madness” here occurs only in Ecclesiastes. However, a related word (which interestingly, in certain forms and circumstances can mean “praise”) gives us examples of people acting mad – such as David in 1 Samuel 21:14.   A good example of the use of the word in a way which may be helpful to our examination is found in Jeremiah 50:38 (speaking of Babylon):

A drought against her waters, that they may be dried up! For it is a land of images, and they are mad over idols. Jeremiah 50:38 (ESV)

What do you think the link is between madness and idols? Did the idols drive them mad? Does their madness drive them to idols? Other related uses are found in Jeremiah 25:16, 46:9 & 51:7; Nahum 2:5. These other uses refer to the madness which comes in chaos or judgment:

They shall drink and stagger and be crazed because of the sword that I am sending among them.Jeremiah 25:16 (ESV)

 Here is the first question then: What is the connection between madness and folly?

Having considered that, what is this verse doing here? What is the point of considering wisdom and folly after having considered pleasure and power?

William Pemble, Ecclesiastes 10:1-3

09 Friday Mar 2012

Posted by in Ecclesiastes

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

 

ASPECT 6, PART I: OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH OURSELVES ECCLESIASTES 10:1-3

 

            Wisdom is a great benefit to ourselves, personally.  It causes us to be careful of our conduct and our reputation.  It also protects us in our wider dealings in the world.

           

TEXT:

 

1 Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour: so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honour. 2 A wise man’s heart is at his right hand; but a fool’s heart at his left. 3 Yea also, when he that is a fool walketh by the way, his wisdom faileth him, and he saith to every one that he is a fool.

 

 

COMMENTARY:

           

            Towards ourselves in our more private conversations wherein wisdom affords us a double benefit:

            First, of circumspection and wariness in our carriage, to maintain our good name and reputation by heedful avoiding [of] all things that might stain: all indiscreet and sinful behavior, though but in some small matter.  This expressed behavior, though but in some small matter.  This expressed in an excellent similitude, comparing a good name to a good ointment of the apothecary, a curious confection well made by art: folly, error, and slips in our conversation, to dead flies in a pot of sweet ordors: Disgrace and shame that comes by sin, to the stink and putrefaction of a costly ointment, which is very loathsome: Lastly, in the degree, dead flies, small and little creatures, yet even a few of them are enough to mar a whole box, so a little folly is sufficient to stain the reputation of him that is in honor for his wisdom; as one sinner destroys much good, verse 2.

            Second, of dexterity and expedition in the dispatch of all affairs, The heart of the wise is at his right hand, i.e., in all business he hath counsel and wisdom present with him for ready and safe ordering of his proceedings.  He puts none but his right hand to his work, the most fit and commodious instrument to work well and speedily, and this hand he so sets to his business, that it is guided by his heart, wisdom and good advice direct him to his doings, verse 2.  This is illustrated by the contrary in fools, but a fool’s heart is at his left hand, i.e., he doth his business rashly, unadvisedly, untowardly, v. 2., which folly is further discovered in an unwise man’s ordinary conversation, ye also when he that is a fool walketh by the way, by his ordinary behavior, gait, gesture, coutenance, speech, his wisdom faileth him, he wants wit to carry himself well; yea, he hath not wit enough to conceal his folly, but proclaims it openly to all, and he saith to every that he is a fool, verse 3.