While reading Ecclesiastes 4:
The thoughts came to my mind concerning the work of those who push back against the murder of the unborn. Why is it a righteous work? The writer of Ecclesiastes considered those that "never existed" taken as those never born were better than those that lived and those that died as oppressed and/ or the owners of the oppressed. Both the rich and powerful and the poor and destitute were far worse off than those who had never been born. For the unborn never had to contend with the evils, the hurts, the sorrows that inflict all, even the dead, all but the unborn
Could it not bring comfort to a woman and man who have lost a child, aborted a child and now grieve and regret, or for those never able to conceive a child to take at face value the wisdom of the writer?
Earlier, in the previous chapter (3), the writer states:
From God's perspective all we see as future God sees as already history - that which has already "passed by."
For the one never born, God has already attended to the matter.
To the hurting and grieving, God has already attended to the matter.
To those who would rejoice in their evil, God has already attended to the matter.
Is it then not true in the statement and the wisdom given by the writer of Ecclesiastes, "Better to have never existed?"
Christ stated, "Better for that man to never have been born." He already new the desperation, torment, and end of such a person.
John 3 declares that the unbeliever is "condemned already." They are dead men walking to the desperation and torments of the end estate.
How much better it is that the believe knows that "there is, therefore, NO condemnation..." that God has already attended to the matter.
Better than any living, yet to live, dead and long dead is those that "never existed."
God has attended to the matter.
Note: I know that Ecclesiastes isn't laid out in a timeline, and that one portion may or may not be connected, other than by showing the vanity of each, so some disagreement upon the use of these two sections may be forthcoming and welcome.
Then I looked again at all the acts of oppression which were being done under the sun. And behold I saw the tears of the oppressed and that they had no one to comfort them; and on the side of their oppressors was power, but they had no one to comfort them. So I congratulated the dead who are already dead more than the living who are still living. But better off than both of them is the one who has never existed, who has never seen the evil activity that is done under the sun.
The thoughts came to my mind concerning the work of those who push back against the murder of the unborn. Why is it a righteous work? The writer of Ecclesiastes considered those that "never existed" taken as those never born were better than those that lived and those that died as oppressed and/ or the owners of the oppressed. Both the rich and powerful and the poor and destitute were far worse off than those who had never been born. For the unborn never had to contend with the evils, the hurts, the sorrows that inflict all, even the dead, all but the unborn
Could it not bring comfort to a woman and man who have lost a child, aborted a child and now grieve and regret, or for those never able to conceive a child to take at face value the wisdom of the writer?
Earlier, in the previous chapter (3), the writer states:
He has made everything appropriate in its time. He has also set eternity in their heart, yet so that man will not find out the work which God has done from the beginning even to the end.
I know that there is nothing better for them than to rejoice and to do good in one's lifetime; moreover, that every man who eats and drinks sees good in all his labor--it is the gift of God. I know that everything God does will remain forever; there is nothing to add to it and there is nothing to take from it, for God has so worked that men should fear Him. That which is has been already and that which will be has already been, for God seeks what has passed by.
I know that there is nothing better for them than to rejoice and to do good in one's lifetime; moreover, that every man who eats and drinks sees good in all his labor--it is the gift of God. I know that everything God does will remain forever; there is nothing to add to it and there is nothing to take from it, for God has so worked that men should fear Him. That which is has been already and that which will be has already been, for God seeks what has passed by.
From God's perspective all we see as future God sees as already history - that which has already "passed by."
For the one never born, God has already attended to the matter.
To the hurting and grieving, God has already attended to the matter.
To those who would rejoice in their evil, God has already attended to the matter.
Is it then not true in the statement and the wisdom given by the writer of Ecclesiastes, "Better to have never existed?"
Christ stated, "Better for that man to never have been born." He already new the desperation, torment, and end of such a person.
John 3 declares that the unbeliever is "condemned already." They are dead men walking to the desperation and torments of the end estate.
How much better it is that the believe knows that "there is, therefore, NO condemnation..." that God has already attended to the matter.
Better than any living, yet to live, dead and long dead is those that "never existed."
God has attended to the matter.
Note: I know that Ecclesiastes isn't laid out in a timeline, and that one portion may or may not be connected, other than by showing the vanity of each, so some disagreement upon the use of these two sections may be forthcoming and welcome.
