Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by patrickg-zill 6240 days ago
Book of Ecclesiastes, nuff said.
2 comments

Wow, I think you just went meta-Ecclesiastes!

What has been, that will be; what has been done, that will be done. Nothing is new under the sun. Even the thing of which we say, "See, this is new!" has already existed in the ages that preceded us.

Ecclesiastes 1:9-10

Poetic but blatantly false.

Actually, you really wonder how Ecclesiastes managed to get included in the Bible, considering that at this point the Earth was supposed to be four thousand years old or whatever. And yet even 4.5 billion years isn't old enough for everything to have happened, not even close. Aren't exponential possibility spaces wonderful?

Poetic but blatantly false.

False now, but true at the time. For most people who have ever lived, nothing new happened during their lifetimes.

I agree with David Mathers. I believe that time has given you enough perspective to put you more than one level above Solomon.

Its poetry is enough reason for me to see it in the Bible, and it reminds us that fame and money themselves are useless.

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/09/level-above.html

If you take it to mean human nature and the completely cyclical patterns of human behavior, then it's most certainly correct. That's how I've always interpreted it.
Verse 9 is about behavior:

  What has been will be again, 
       what has been done will be done again
Verse 10 is about things:

  Is there anything of which one can say, 
       "Look! This is something new"?
I think verse 9 is false. Remember one of the ways Solomon got his pleasure: "I bought male and female slaves and had other slaves who were born in my house." That's the only thing I can think of though.
Why does the case of Solomon's slaves negate verse 9?

There has always been slavery, and there is still slavery today, and lots of explicitly sexual slavery too.

There's a reason they call it the Bible.
Because it is a book?

early 14c., from Anglo-L. biblia, from M.L./L.L. biblia (neuter plural interpreted as fem. sing.), in phrase biblia sacra "holy books," from Gk. ta biblia to hagia "the holy books," from biblion "paper, scroll," the ordinary word for "book," originally a dim. of byblos "Egyptian papyrus," possibly so called from the name of the Phoenician port from which Egyptian papyrus was exported to Greece. The port's name is a Gk. corruption of Phoenician Gebhal (modern Jbeil, Lebanon), said to mean lit. "frontier town" (cf. Heb. gebhul "frontier, boundary," Arabic jabal "mountain"). The Christian scripture was refered to in Gk. as Ta Biblia as early as c.223. Bible replaced O.E. biblioưece "the Scriptures," from Gk. bibliotheke, lit. "book-repository" (from biblion + theke "case, chest, sheath"), used of the Bible by Jerome and the common L. word for it until Biblia began to displace it 9c. Figurative sense of "any authoritative book" is from 1804. Bible Belt first attested 1926, reputedly coined by H.L. Mencken.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=Bible

The parent post said "Book of Ecclesiastes, nuff said." in reference to an article about lifestyle. I made a tongue-in-cheek comment about how we should obviously start taking our values from the Bible. Bible = word of God = axioms to live by. That's why it's correct!