“Again, I observed all the oppression that takes place under the sun. I saw the tears of the oppressed, with no one to comfort them. The oppressors have great power, and their victims are helpless. So I concluded that the dead are better off than the living. But most fortunate of all are those who are not yet born. For they have not seen all the evil that is done under the sun. Then I observed that most people are motivated to success because they envy their neighbors. But this, too, is meaningless—like chasing the wind. “Fools fold their idle hands, leading them to ruin.” And yet, “Better to have one handful with quietness than two handfuls with hard work and chasing the wind.” I observed yet another example of something meaningless under the sun. This is the case of a man who is all alone, without a child or a brother, yet who works hard to gain as much wealth as he can. But then he asks himself, “Who am I working for? Why am I giving up so much pleasure now?” It is all so meaningless and depressing. Two people are better off than one, for they can help each other succeed. If one person falls, the other can reach out and help. But someone who falls alone is in real trouble. Likewise, two people lying close together can keep each other warm. But how can one be warm alone? A person standing alone can be attacked and defeated, but two can stand back-to-back and conquer. Three are even better, for a triple-braided cord is not easily broken. It is better to be a poor but wise youth than an old and foolish king who refuses all advice. Such a youth could rise from poverty and succeed. He might even become king, though he has been in prison. But then everyone rushes to the side of yet another youth who replaces him. Endless crowds stand around him, but then another generation grows up and rejects him, too. So it is all meaningless—like chasing the wind.”
Ecclesiastes 4:1-16 NLT
Solomon ponders the nature of relationships, and though one of the most beautiful treatises on relationships is found in this chapter, it is clear that the prognosis is fairly bleak. That is to say that Solomon is largely utilitarian in his thoughts. His conclusions are clearly exactly that. They are stoic and based on an underlying principle of a proto-social contract theory. This is undoubtedly the lens that many deep thinkers, but God deniers, use to reconcile their innate desire to marry and have children and have friends. Yet, it should not be seen as the preferred thought process. Solomon is essentially relationship-neutral. He clearly lacks a Trinitarian-informed understanding that leads to the prosocial biblical stance. Yet, he is able to parse that it is better to be prosocial. Here we should highlight the superiority of Christ and the philosophical axis point that he provides. The theology that is discovered in him can make sense of the quandary of relationships. In him, the Roman axiom to love your concubine and not your wife is necessarily inverted. People are not for accomplishing goals, though that is their outcome. They are for fulfillment of personhood in the expression of the Godhead. Solomon didn’t understand. Post Christ, we have no excuse.
Solomon’s View on Relationships: Solomon’s perspective on relationships is utilitarian and stoic, lacking a biblical understanding of human connection.
Superiority of Christ’s Philosophy: Christ’s teachings offer a superior understanding of relationships, emphasizing the inherent value of individuals and the pursuit of personhood.
Purpose of Human Relationships: Human relationships are not solely for achieving goals but for fulfilling personhood and reflecting the nature of God.
JOSH McGARY.COM 