Mark part five

If we look more closely at the list of the twelve apostles mentioned in Mark chapter three, we see that Levi the tax collector is not mentioned. However, in Matthew 10:3, we are told that Matthew was the tax collector. Are Levi and Matthew the same person as is traditionally said? Let's look at each gospel account.

Mark chapter two says Levi is the "son of Alphaeus" and a tax collector. He follows Jesus. Jesus eats with him. The name Levi is no where else in Mark. In chapter three, Matthew is named as one of the twelve, but Mark does not say Matthew was a tax collector. Matthew is nowhere else in the book of Mark. Oddly enough, The author calls another one of the twelve "James the son of Alphaeus." Were James and Levi brothers? There is no mention of Alphaeus again in the book of Mark.

Matthew chapter 10 mentions Matthew the tax collector and James the son of Alphaeus. Matthew does not mention the name Levi at all in the whole book. He tells the same story of the tax collector, in chapter 9, but uses the name Matthew instead. The author of Matthew does not call the tax collector the son of Alphaeus. Matthew is not mentioned any more in the rest of the book of Matthew, neither is Alphaeus. You would think that if the book of Matthew was actually written by Matthew, he would have injected himself into the story more.

Luke speaks of Levi the tax collector in chapter five. He is not called the son of Alphaeus. Matthew is mentioned as one of the twelve in chapter six, but is not called a tax collector. James the son of Alphaeus is listed as one of the twelve. Alphaeus is not mentioned again in Luke, neither is Levi or Matthew.

Acts chapter one also names the twelve apostles. It does not mention the name Levi. It names Matthew and James, the son of Alphaeus. There is no other mention of Matthew or Alphaeus in Acts. There are no other instances of Levi the tax collector, Matthew, or Alphaeus in the whole rest of the New Testament. Paul does not mention any of them either.

Now let's look at another of the twelve mentioned in Mark 3, Thaddaeus. In the KJV, Matthew 10 says his name was Lebbaeus with the last name of Thaddaeus. The NIV and other translations only say Thaddaeus. Neither Lebbaeus or Thaddaeus are mentioned elsewhere in the bible. Luke 6 lists a "Judas SON of James" in the NIV instead of Thaddaeus, and so does Acts chapter one. The KJV calls this person in Luke and Acts "Judas the BROTHER of James." The Greek actually looks like "Judas of James." It seems that Judas's relationship to James is actually unclear. Most commentaries tend to assume that all these names, Lebbaeus, Thaddaeus, and Judas were the same person.

A Judas is also mentioned in Matthew 13:55 as one of the brothers of Jesus. Some people think this Judas is the same person as above and the author of the book of Jude. Though that seems problematic to me, considering Judas and Thaddaeus are supposed to be the same person and Thaddaeus is mentioned in Matthew 10.

A Judas is mentioned once more in John 14:22. This Judas asks Jesus why he will reveal himself to just the apostles and not the whole world. This Judas is also assumed to be the apostle. Paul does not mention any Judas.


Are we confused yet?

Mark part four

We are in the second half of Mark chapter two. Jesus now has five disciples, Simon, Andrew, James, John, and Levi. Levi is a tax collector. In verse 15, we find Jesus at Levi's house eating with many tax collectors and "sinners." Three times sinners are mentioned in this passage and all three times the word is put in quotation marks with no explanation for that. My study bible also says that these sinners were "notoriously evil people" like adulterers and robbers. It is also unclear how that conclusion was arrived at.

The pharisees apparently saw Jesus eating with these social outcasts and criticized it. How did they see that? Was everyone eating outside? Were the Pharisees looking in the windows? Jesus's defense against the pharisees charges was that he was not there to call the righteous, but the sinners.

Next, we are told that John's disciples and the pharisees were fasting, which probably made them cranky. The story doesn't say the occasion of the fast, but it was presumably religious. People wanted to know why Jesus and his disciples were not fasting. Jesus uses a metaphor to say they don't need to fast because he is with them, when he is gone then they will fast. He's special. Then Jesus makes another metaphor about old wine skins and new wine skins, which, to me, makes no sense at all in this context.

The next story takes place on a sabbath. Jesus and his disciples are walking through grain fields and the disciples begin picking heads of grain, presumably to eat. The pharisees, who must have been walking with them, tattle to Jesus, saying what the disciples are doing is unlawful on the sabbath. Jesus then gives an example of David breaking the mosaic law when he was hungry. He says "the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath." Yeah, right. That is why god gave a death penalty for breaking the Sabbath. The story of David breaking the law and getting away with it only proves that no one was willing to kill him for that transgression, if it actually happened. In fact, throughout history, Jews have been reluctant to carry out all the various death penalties mentioned in the law of Moses.

Chapter three tell us that "another time he went into the synagogue and a man with a shriveled hand was there." Jesus was watched carefully to see if he would heal the man on the sabbath. Of course, Jesus bucked convention and healed the man's hand with a great deal of show. Apparently these healings did not impress the pharisees, because they began to plot Jesus's death. I wonder how the pharisees would have told this story. Did they think Jesus was a charlatan? Or were they actually so mean hearted as to prefer Jesus's death over his miraculous healings?

In chapter 3, verses 7-12, Jesus is being followed by crowds of people from all over the region, because of the healings. Demon possessed people are falling down before him and calling him the son of god, but he is adamant that they should not tell anyone.  It does not say he exorcised all those demons. If he did, why would he have to tell them to shut up? Because of all the crowds, Jesus had a boat ready to take him away, at the sea of Galilee.

In verse 13, Jesus decides to take a few select people with him up on a mountainside. There he selects his twelve apostles. We've only read of five up to now. The twelve are Simon, who we are told Jesus names Peter, which means "pebble." Does this say something about Peter's personality? There are also James and John, who Jesus calls "the sons of thunder." Then we have, Andrew, Philip, Thomas, Matthew, another James, Thaddeus, another Simon, and Judas Iscariot, who is said to have betrayed Jesus. There is a little foreshadowing there.

More to come.

Mark part three

We are still in chapter one at verse 35. In this book, we don't know how long after Jesus was baptized that he started preaching, or how old he was, but it was after John was put in prison. The last few events have been depicted as happening in rapid succession. The appearance in the synagogue, the healings at Simon's  house, and now we are told that "early in the morning, while it was still dark" Jesus got up, left the house, and went out to pray alone. His other companions went to find him because everyone was looking for him. He wanted to leave that place and travel around to teach  and drive out demons.

In chapter two, a man with leprosy begged to be healed. Jesus healed him then told him not to tell anyone but to go to the priest and make the required sacrifices. Naturally the man told everyone and Jesus was mobbed by people, even though he tried to hide. "A few days later" Jesus went back to Capernaum. I'm assuming he stayed at Simon's house again. The house he was in was also mobbed by people, so that there was no room for any more. A hole was dug in the roof (probably made of mud and straw) so a paralyzed man could be lowered in to Jesus. Jesus was impressed by his faith and told the man his sins were forgiven. Some teachers of the law were thinking to themselves that this was blasphemy because only god could forgive sins. If course Jesus knew what they were thinking and asked them which was easier, to tell a paralyzed man  his sins were forgiven or to tell him to get up and walk.

Then he tells the man to get up and walk, and he did, in full view of everyone. They were amazed and praised god, saying, "we have never seen anything like this!" Well, now, that must have been a true miracle, right? Let me ask you some questions. Has anyone ever been fooled by fake faith healers? Has anyone ever exaggerated faith healing claims?  Has anyone ever manufactured faith healing experiences? If your answer is yes, what makes you think there couldn't have been fake faith healers in the first century? How do you know this account is accurate? How do you even know it actually happened? And if it did, how do you know whether or not the "paralyzed" man was faking his condition? The author of the book of Mark is telling a story about Jesus, he does not claim to have seen any of this. He either got it second or third hand, or it was an urban legend,  or someone told him a tall tale, or he is telling a tall tale himself. There are many possibilities more likely than that a paralyzed man was instantly healed by faith.

 Mark tells us that this event happened so that "you may know the son of man has the authority to forgive sins." It is assumed that the "son of man" refers to Jesus himself. This may be a reference to Daniel 7:13-14, where Daniel has a vision of a person who looked like a "son of man"  This person was given authority by god and was worshipped by all nations and given an everlasting kingdom. The phrase son of man literally means a human male. It is also important to remember that the book of Daniel was not written by Daniel and is most likely a work of fiction. Did Jesus know that?

In Chapter 2:13, at some undetermined future time, Jesus was again beside the lake (the sea of Galilee) teaching large crowds of people. As he walked along, he saw Levi (later known as Matthew) sitting in a tax collectors booth. (There were tax collector booths by the lake? ) My study bible says this may have been like a toll booth on a main road. Jesus told Levi to follow him and he did. Disciple #5.

More to come.

Mark part two

We are in Mark chapter one, at verse twelve. Jesus has just been baptized by John the baptist who was said to have been in a desert area. The spirit, which has descended on Jesus sends him "out into the desert," which must have been nearby. Jesus stayed in the desert forty days (magical number) being tempted by Satan.  Mark says he was with wild animals and angels attended him. This story is much shorter than the similar event recorded in other gospels. It includes very few details. Notice that no one else was with him as a witness. So, if this was Jesus's claim, everyone who heard it would have had to take his word that he was telling the truth. Can you think of any reason why he would lie?

From there, the text jumps  to John the baptist being in prison, after which Jesus went into Galilee telling people to repent because the kingdom of god was near, they were to believe the good news (aka gospel). Do you see that? Jesus didn't start preaching till AFTER John was out of the way. John could not publicly contradict Jesus's claims  if he wanted to. Also, the "good news" here was the approaching kingdom of god. It feels like there are so many different gospels in the new testament.

When Jesus was at the Sea of Galilee (which is actually a lake) he recruited Simon  (later called Peter) and his brother Andrew by telling the two fishermen that he would make them "fishers of men." How punny. Naturally, they dropped everything and followed him. In this same way, he also recruited James and John, who were just about to go out to fish in their father's boat. Now there are four disciples. Disciple just means student.

They all went to Capernaum. On the Sabbath (Saturday), Jesus taught in the synagogue. This is not anything special. I'm pretty sure any male Jew was allowed to get up and say something in turn. However, the text claims that what Jesus said impressed everyone, but it does not record his words on the occasion. While he was speaking, a man possessed by an evil spirit starts yelling at Jesus. He accuses Jesus of coming to destroy them and says he knows who Jesus is..."the holy one of god." (What if it was actually just some guy yelling, "Hey, I know who he is."  Then the story got stretched. It could have happened that way.) Jesus commands the spirit to be quiet and come out of the man, which it does with a shriek. Good cinema. In fact, if this actually happened, who's to say Jesus didn't plant the man in the audience. That kind of thing happens today.

The people were so gullible amazed that they began gossiping about this guy who taught like he knew what he was talking about and could exorcise demons. Naturally the news spread quickly. The five of them then went to the home of Simon and Andrew, where Jesus got rid of Peter's mother-in-law's fever. Then she began to wait on them, 'cause that's what women were expected to do after recovering from a fever and they needed someone to wait on them. Jesus did all this stuff on the Sabbath. The mother-in-law also waited on the men on the Sabbath. Was it just men who were not supposed to work on the Sabbath? Or was waiting on men not considered work?

After sunset, when it was no longer the Sabbath, people began to bring all their sick and demon possessed to Jesus to be healed. He apparently healed a lot of people with "various diseases" and exorcised many demons. (I wonder if had the same success rate modern faith healers have.) However, he didn't let any of the demons speak "because they knew who he was." Ha. That's kind of funny if you think about it. People who knew who Jesus was were not allowed to speak and were said to have demons. Hmm. There is definitely more than one way to look at that.

More to come.

Mark part one

Let us begin reading Mark. Right away I notice there is no virgin birth story. There is no mother Mary and father Joseph. No divine conception of Jesus by the holy spirit. So, if Mark stood alone, we would have to assume Jesus was conceieved and birthed in the normal human way. The first chapter begins by telling us that the gospel of Jesus Christ began in Isaiah with a prophecy about a messenger who will prepare the way for the lord. And that messenger was John the baptizer. Did Mark not know of the supposed prophecy of a virgin giving birth? Wouldn't that have been a pertinent part of Jesus's back story? If Mark was the first gospel writer, did Matthew and Luke each make up their Jesus origin  stories? Both of their stories are very different after all.

Beginning in verse 4, John the baptist is described as a man dressed in camel hair clothing who preached out in the desert. He was telling the Jews who came to him that they needed to be baptized with a baptism of repentance for the remission of their sins. Basically that means they were given a ceremonial bath to show that they were cleansing themselves from past sins. They may not have actually done anything that we would consider wrong, like theft or murder. "Sins" are committed whenever god's laws are broken. They could have included any number of innocuous things, like cooking on the Sabbath or not tithing properly. Who knows what these people were repenting of.

At that time, the Romans had control over Israel, and many Jews were very concerned about this state of things. Just like today, there would have been religious people blaming the undesirable conditions on a state of moral laxity and religious decay. A call to repent is ubiquitous throughout religious history.

While John was out in the desert baptizing, he told people someone more powerful than him was coming, someone who would baptize the people with the holy spirit instead of water. Hmm, it sounds like John was saying holy spirit baptism is superior to  water baptism. That's not what I was taught.

Then along comes Jesus from Nazareth. He was baptized by John in the Jordan river. When he came up out of the water, "he saw heaven being torn open and the spirit descending on him like a dove. And a voice came from heaven: You are my son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased." Look at that. The text does not say that John knew who Jesus was when he came to be baptized. It also does not say anyone else but Jesus himself was witness to this miraculous voice. Oh my nonexistent god! Jesus here is having an experience like Paul claims to have had on the road to Damascus. There are no other witnesses claimed for this event. Wouldn't it have been important for Mark to include witnesses, if there were any?

Note that there is no mention of Bethlehem, wise men following stars, Herod killing children, censuses, or genealogical descent from David. In fact, so far, this story is not anchored in time.

My previous series on the nativity begins here.(link)

More to come.

Mark, introduction

After some debate with myself, I decided the next thing we would study is the book of Mark. I have not gone completely through any of the so-called gospels yet on this blog. According to Wikipedia, most scholars now consider Mark to be the first of the four gospel books. It may have been written just before the fall of Jerusalem. Its authorship has traditionally been attributed to John Mark who is said to have been influenced by Peter. In reality no one actually knows who wrote the book of Mark. It was originally considered inferior to the other gospels as a summary or abridgment because it is more concise.

A few years ago, a claim was made that a 1st century manuscript of Mark had been found. That claim has since been revised to late 2nd, early 3rd. Here is what Bart Ehrman has to say about it. This is one of the earliest existing pieces of the book. Just as with all the rest of the bible books, there is no original.

I will now make my regular disclaimer that I am not a professional Bible scholar. I will be reading through the text and making personal comments and observations based on easily available resources and my personal experiences as a former fundamentalist Christian. I usually use the NIV translation of the bible,  web sites such as Bible Hub and Bible Gateway, plus Strong's concordance, and a Greek interlinear New Testament.

Till next time.

Resurrection part four.

We are still in 1 Corinthians chapter 15. Verse 29 says, "if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?" Good question. In fact I've got another question. Why are Mormons the only people I know of who baptize for the dead. Why doesn't all of christendom practice this? It's biblical.

If we move on to verse 35, Paul tells us what resurrection is like. According to him, there are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies. Earthly bodies that die are metaphorically like seeds that are being sown. The body that is sown is perishable, but what rises up after death is imperishable. "It is sown a natural body and raised a spiritual body." Here is Paul's logic for that: Adam was made a living being, then he was given a spirit. That means spiritual stuff comes after natural stuff. Therefore spiritual bodies come after natural bodies. Duh!

Further proof of  spiritual bodies, offered by Paul, is this: Adam, who was the first man, came from the earth. All earthly men are like Adam. The second man (Jesus?) came from heaven. All men are going to be like the second man. As usual, no women are mentioned. Further more, Paul says, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of god, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.....we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed." Paul promises the Corinthians immortality. He says nothing here about judgment on that day, or what happens to non-believers.

In Philippians 4:10-11, Paul says he wants to know Christ and the power of his resurrection, so he can also attain resurrection some day. In Hebrews 6, the author says the resurrection of the dead is one of the elementary teachings about Christ, along with repentance, faith, baptism, and eternal judgment." In Hebrews 11:35 tells of those who were tortured for their faith and refused to be released so that they might have a better resurrection. (!!) That is so messed up.

1 Peter chapter one speaks of a hope of an eternal inheritance for the suffering faithful being kept in heaven and the coming salvation of souls in the last times. This hope comes through the resurrection of Jesus.  1 Peter chapter three tells  the reader that baptism with water saves people by the resurrection of Jesus.

Finally, we come back to Revelation 20, where we read of a first resurrection of Christian martyrs and a second resurrection of the rest of the dead, from the sea and Hades. Then comes judgment and second death for anyone whose name is not written in the lambs book of life.

Does this give you a sense of why Christians are so keen on martyrdom? It should also show you that these beliefs are what many Christians believe they are living for, an eternal reward  of an imperishable body, for the price of faithfullness. Any alternative is unthinkable to so many. It's hard not to feel sorry for them, wasting so much precious time and thought on a delusion.

Resurrection part three

We are still in the books of Acts. In chapter 23, Paul is in Jerusalem and  has been taken into custody by some Roman soldiers because some Jews are supposed to have caused a riot in objection to Paul's presence in the temple. The Roman commander doesn't understand why there is such animosity towards Paul. (He's been preaching about Jesus.) So, the commander takes Paul to the Sanhedrin, the Jewish ruling body. Paul plays off the fact that there are both Pharisees and Sadducees in the Sanhedrin. Pharisees believe in a resurrection, Sadducees do not. Paul shouts out that he is a Pharisee and is on trial because of his belief in a resurrection. Of course that is part of the truth, but not the whole truth. The Pharisees and Sadducees present get into a violent argument. Paul has to be removed from there by the commander.

In Acts chapter 24, Paul has been brought before the governor. The high priest of the Jews has charged him with being a troublemaker, inciting riots, being a ringleader of "the Nazarene sect," and trying to desecrate the temple. Paul denies any wrong doing and says he was in compliance with the religious laws and no one can prove otherwise.  He admits to being a member of the sect called "the way" and again says that it he has hope of a resurrection of the righteous and the wicked. It is concerning the resurrection of the dead that he was there. Paul had been teaching about the resurrection of Jesus.

We move on to the book of Romans, which was written before the book of Acts. Paul is telling the Romans about baptism and metaphorically comparing it to burial. Just as Jesus was buried and was raised again, believers are united with Jesus in the burial of baptism, so they are also united with him in his resurrection. After they are raised out of the waters of baptism, their "bodies of sin" are gone and they may live new lives. There is a definite blurring of the lines between reality and metaphor in this teaching of Paul's. Nothing actually happens to a person when they are baptized, besides getting wet. In spite of what Paul says, a baptized person still dies and still "sins." Any difference is all in their heads.

In 1 Corinthians chapter 15, starting in verse12, Paul again speaks of resurrection. Apparently, some Corinthians may have been teaching that there was no resurrection of the dead. Paul says,"if there is no resurrection, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith." Ain't that the truth. Also that would make the preachers liars. Yep. And all those who died in Christ are lost. No, just dead.

Paul goes on to say that Christ HAS been raised from the dead. He is the first fruits of those who have "fallen asleep" or dies. Paul is claiming here that Christ was the first to be resurrected. He obviously hasn't read Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John. Probably because he wrote all his material before those books were written. He also obviously never heard of the times Jesus resurrected people from the dead, or the dead that rose right after Jesus died. Paul says that "in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive."

According to Paul, Christ was first and when he comes back those who belong to him will rise. Then comes the interesting part, which is a bit different from what Revelation 20 says: "Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to god the father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death." Paul goes on to say this destruction Jesus is doing obviously doesn't include destroying god. After all this stuff happens, the son will be be made subject to god so that god may be all in all. I don't understand why god needs Jesus to do all that, or anything else.Can't he just speak stuff into happening?

More to come.

Resurrection part two

We are still in the book of John. In chapter 11, Jesus' friend Lazarus has died. His sister Martha is distraught. She is convinced that if Jesus had come sooner, Lazarus would not have died. In verse 23, Jesus tells Martha Lazarus will rise again. Martha says, "I know he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." Jesus replies, " I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die." Jesus asks Martha if she believes this and she says she does. Martha goes and tells her sister Mary  that Jesus has arrived. Mary runs and tells Jesus the same thing Martha had, that Lazarus would still be alive if Jesus had come sooner. This time however, Jesus does not give his resurrection spiel. He responds to Mary's distress in a more emotional way. He weeps. Why? Presumably he knows he's going to raise Lazarus from the dead. Even if he waits till judgment day, Lazarus is guaranteed to live again, right? Unsurprisingly, that is no consolation to the living. It rarely is.

So, As we all know, Jesus ends up raising Lazarus from the dead. We are told from the passage that Lazarus was not just merely dead but really most sincerely dead.  There are so many questions I have about this event. Is this considered a resurrection? It also took place before Jesus was resurrected. Did Lazarus get a new fully human body? How did Lazarus feel about it? After all, he would presumably have to die and be resurrected again some day. Will Lazarus have to go through the final judgment?

Lets move on to the book of Acts. In chapter 1, verse 22, the  disciples/apostles, decide to choose someone to replace Judas. It must be someone who was with Jesus from the beginning of his ministry. This person is to become a co-witness of Jesus' resurrection, not to mention make the disciples twelve again. Eleven is not quite as magical. Matthias is chosen and we never hear about him again.

In Acts 2:31, Peter tells a crowd of Jews that "David died and was buried and his tomb is here to this day." (Funny thing that. No one actually knows where David's tomb is, if there was one. There are some doubts as to whether David actually existed. The only extrabiblical evidence of him is found in a couple of unclear stone inscriptions. ) Peter says David was a prophet who predicted Jesus and his resurrection. He goes on to say, "god has raised this Jesus to life and we (the disciples) are all witnesses of the fact." According to Peter, David didn't go up to heaven, but Jesus did. The Jesus that the Jews crucified was now both lord and Christ. This is one of the bible passages often used to justify anti-semitism.

In Acts 4:2, the Sadducees are disturbed because Peter and John were preaching in Jesus about the resurrection of the dead. They got a lot of people to believe them. In 4:32-36, the believers begin to pool all their funds and resources in a kind of cooperative socialism, and the apostles continue to preach about the resurrection of Jesus. (Isn't it funny that so many fundamentalist christians today think any and all socialism or social welfare is evil.)

In Acts 17:18-34, Paul is preaching in Athens about Jesus and the resurrection, to some Epicurean and Stoic philosophers. He tells them that the god who created everything and everyone "has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead." Many of them called Paul a babbler and sneered at him when he mentioned resurrection. Others are said to have believed. One thing: How is the resurrection of one man proof that there is going to be a resurrection of all and a final judgment? It doesn't necessarily follow. It seems to be typical of biblical logic to make such leaps.

More to come.

Resurrection part one

I feel like we need to cover resurrection in the bible as a natural segue to the study of heaven. First I want to note that the word resurrection does not appear at all in the Old Testament. What do you make of that? In the New Testament, the Greek word usually translated resurrection is anastasis, which according to Strong's concordance, means "standing up again" or a literal resurrection from the dead. It can also be used in a figurative sense. We will see how that works as we go through the scriptures.

We first encounter the word resurrection in Matthew 22. Verse 23 tells us that the Jewish sect of the Saducees did not believe in a resurrection. That would make sense, since the Hebrew scriptures do not contain the word. In verse 28, Jesus is asked a trick question about marriage after the resurrection by the Saducees. Jesus replied, "silly Saducees, marriage is not for the resurrected." Instead, Jesus goes on to say, the resurrected dead will have bodies like angels. Jesus's proof of the resurrection is that god said he is the god of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Since god is not the god of the dead, but the living, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, must be alive. How can they be alive, unless they are resurrected? Gotcha! Does this mean Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were already resurrected, before the final judgment? The book of Revelation skipped that part. Does this mean they were resurrected before Jesus? I thought he was supposed to be the first.

In Matthew 27:51-53, after Jesus died on the cross, there was an earthquake. "The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. (Before Jesus?) They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people." Strangely, there is no other record of this extraordinary event.

Mark chapter 12 also tells the story of the Sadducees asking about marriage for the resurrected. So does Luke chapter 20. Luke adds that the resurrected will no longer die and they are god's children. Luke also adds that to god, everyone is alive, which is interesting. If everyone is alive to god, what's the resurrection for?

In Luke 14:13-14, Jesus says, "when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous." Did Jesus appeal to empathy and say that all people need to eat and that it's good to feed those less fortunate, because if they were in that situation, the listeners would need food also. No, he did not. Instead, he appealed to their selfishness. They would get a reward from god...eventually.

We are now at John chapter 5. Here we get new resurrection information. Jesus tells the Jews who are persecuting him that he is the son of god the father. Verses 21-22 say, "Just as the father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. Moreover, the father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the son." In Revelation 20:11 is unclear about who s sitting on the throne of judgment. It says things like "he who is seated on the throne." Revelation 22 calls it the throne of god and the lamb, as though the two are melded together.

John 5:24-29 goes on to say, "whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. (Sounds a bit metaphorical there.) ...a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the son of god and those who hear will live....Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out--those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned." Wait, no baptism requirement?

More to come.

Church of Christ statistics

In case you are new here, I attend a church of Christ congregation with my family. My husband is the only one of them who knows I am an atheist.  We don't talk about it because it upsets him. Recently, over on the Patheos blog Roll To Disbelieve, there has been a conversation about the decline in Christianity. I got curious and did some simple research on the churches of Christ in the United States.

This article in the Christian Chronicle, a church of Christ newspaper, gives an historical overview up to 2009. The statistics are routinely compiled by 21st Century Christian, a Church of Christ publishing company: https://christianchronicle.org/church-in-america-marked-by-decline/

Notice that the decline began after the peak in 2003, when it is reported that the group keeping the statistics decided to become hard-nosed and eliminate instrumental congregations from the ranks. This would not fully account for the decline in the number of congregations, but maybe a large number of attendees, because a few of the rare mega churches in the denomination are instrumental. Even when only non-instrumental congregations were counted, the numbers were still creeping down through to 2009, as shown in the article. 

According to an addendum to the article, in 2012, the decision to dismiss instrumental churches from the ranks was reversed. However that reversal was obviously not permanent. The 2018 report includes only a cappella congregations. That is found here: https://www.21stcc.com/pdfs/ccusa_stats_sheet.pdf

After reviewing the statistics freely available, I have found that number of counted congregations has shrunk by about 9% since the 2003 peak, at an average rate of about 79 a year. The number of total members, which means baptized believers on the rolls, has decreased by about 12% over the last 15 years. The number of total adherents on the congregations' rolls, which includes non baptized children, has also decreased by about 13%. 

The average attendance over just the last three years, state by state on this document, https://www.21stcc.com/pdfs/PDF_Sample_1.pdf   has decreased by as low as 3% in bible belt areas to up to 8% in places like California and Colorado. The attendance in Maine was down 15%, but its churches are historically small. 

These numbers seem to show that most of the gains since 1980 have been lost. If this trend continues, in another decade church of Christ numbers could approach the levels seen about 1950. I have no doubts at all that this decline is due to the effects of the expansion of the internet, the effects of social media, and the politicization of religion.

(I previously commented about these statistics on the Roll to Disbelieve blog.This post is a cleaned up version.)

Heaven part thirteen and wrap up.

We have reached the end of the references to heaven (singular) in Strong's concordance. There a few more under heavens (plural). In Acts 2:29-34, we are told that David died and was buried, and remains in his tomb, he did not ascend to the heavens. I feel this brings up an important point. In christianity, many believers tend to think their love ones ascend to heaven immediately after death. This negates many of the New Testament teachings about a resurrection of the dead and a final judgment, especially what we find in Revelation 20. You can't have it both ways.

In 2 Corinthians 5:1, the author says, "If the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from god, an eternal house in the heavens, not built by human hands." Okay. So, this house in the heavens, is it in the new Jerusalem that's going to come down from the heavens after the judgment? Do any of the letters attributed to Paul speak of a Holy City or new Jerusalem? I ran those phrases through the search on Bible Gateway. A new Jerusalem is not mentioned anywhere but Revelation. Of all the New Testament books, the phrase holy city is only in Matthew and Revelation. Matthew is referring to the city of Jerusalem that existed in the first century.

Did Paul not know about the new heaven and new earth? I looked up those phrases as well. They are only mentioned in Revelation and in 2 Peter. 2 Peter chapter three has a description of the end times that is not couched in symbolism like that of Revelation, but it coincides with events mentioned. In verse 7, the author says, "the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men." In verse 10, the author says, "the heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire , and earth and everything in it will be laid bare." Verses 12-13 go on to say,"That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire and the elements will melt in the heat. But in keeping with his promise, we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness." Paul's  letters do not mention those phrases at all.

In reality, the earthly and heavenly dwellings mentioned by Paul in 2 Corinthians are referring to supposedly earthly and heavenly personal bodies. Paul was big on talking about how believers would get new indestructible bodies. He doesn't seem to have mentioned much else about the afterlife and the actual place those bodies will reside.

Let's see if we can find anything else new and interesting in the New Testament under the word "heavenly." 1 Corinthians chapter 15 discusses the resurrection, but even though the author rambles on about it, he doesn't say much that is concrete or substantial. Like I said before it is mostly about the difference between earthly bodies and heavenly bodies, the resurrection of physical bodies, and their transformation into spiritual, imperishable ones. This will all happen "in a flash, in the tinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet." Nothing about heaven, the holy city, or what will go on in the afterlife.

In 2 Timothy 4:18, Paul says, "The lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom." Is this the same kingdom that will be the New Jerusalem coming down out of the heavens after the judgment?

Hebrews 11:16 says that a heavenly country and city are prepared by god for the faithful. In Hebrews chapter 12, the author speaks of the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living god. Again the writer of Hebrews tells us that earthly things are just representations of the heavenly reality. In verses 26-28, we are told that the earthly or created things will be removed so that what cannot be shaken, god's kingdom, remains.

Does any of this coincide with what you have learned about heaven? It certainly isn't what I was taught and what I continue to hear from Christians around me.

Heaven part twelve

Here we are again, back in heaven. As we go to Revelation chapter 15, we see there is a temple in heaven called the "tabernacle of testimony." Seven shining angels come out of the temple with seven plagues. Those four strange creatures with all the eyes and wings, that were said to be near the throne of god, give the angels seven bowls filled with god's wrath. The temple was filled with smoke  from the glory of god and no one can enter. The angels release the plagues in the next few chapters.

In chapter 19, there is a white horse in heaven whose rider is "the word of god," obviously a reference to the christ. The armies of heaven are following him. An angel stands in the sun and yells to all the birds to come feast on the flesh of all people. There is a great battle which the christ wins, of course. The birds feast, Satan is thrown into the abyss, and the christ reigns for 1,000 years. After the thousand years, Satan is released, there is another battle, and Satan's army is defeated by fire from heaven. Satan is thrown into the lake of fire, the judgement of the dead happens, then chapter 21 introduces us to the author's vision of the new heaven and new earth.

The old heaven and old earth are gone and there is no longer any sea. The holy city, a new Jerusalem comes down out of heaven from god, like a bride dressed for her husband. . The personage  sitting on the throne (Yahweh?)  says, "I am making everything new....It is done. I am the alpha and the omega...." (I thought the alpha and omega was supposed to refer to Jesus?)Everyone who overcomes will inherit the spring of the water of life, and he will be their god, and they will be his son. (No women?)

The new Jerusalem coming down from heaven is said to be shining with the glory of god. That's funny, in chapter 15, the glory of god was smoke. The holy city gleamed like a precious jewel or crystal.. "It had a great, high wall with twelve gates, and with twelve angels at the gates. On the gates were written the names of the twelve tribes of Israel....The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the lamb." Do you see why some Christians today are obsessed with Israel and Jerusalem?

The holy city was 12,000 stadia (1,400 miles) long, wide, and HIGH! The wall was 144 (12x12) cubits thick. "The wall was made of jasper and the city of pure gold...The foundations of the city walls were decorated with every precious stone"  in twelve layers. The twelve gates were made of twelve single pearls. The streets were of pure gold. There is no temple, god and the lamb are its temple. There is no sun or moon, god and the lamb are the light. The gates will never shut because it will never be night. Nothing impure will ever enter it, only those whose names are written in the lamb's book of life.

The river of the water of life will flow from the the throne of god and the lamb (they sit on the same throne? ) down the middle of the great street. "On each side of the river stood the tree of life." What? Does the tree straddle the river? Or are there two trees of life? The tree is bearing twelve crops of fruit, one crop each month. The leaves of the tree are for healing the nations. There will be no more curse. The throne of god and the lamb will be in the city and his servants will see him and his name will be on their foreheads, and they will reign forever and ever. Revelation ends with a warning that anyone who takes words away from this book of prophecy will have his share in the tree of life and the holy city taken away from him.

Well, well, well. That was interesting. Did you see all the times the magic numbers seven and twelve were used? Do you think this description of the new Jerusalem was meant to be taken literally? If it is metaphorical or symbolic, what exactly does it represent?Did you notice that the saved don't go up to heaven? They go to live in the holy city, which comes down to the new earth. God and Jesus come down to earth with the holy city. Everything glows with an eternal light. No sun, no moon. Who is left in heaven? All the multitudes of angels?

Heaven part eleven

Are you getting tired of heaven? We aren't done yet but it should go faster because I don't think there is much left that is not redundant. One thing I have noticed is that heaven is thoroughly populated with angels. Angels are not discussed much in the churches of Christ, the faith tradition I came from.
Galations 1:8 says that if an angel from heaven, or anyone else, teaches you a gospel other than the one you learned from Paul, he will be eternally condemned!

Ephesians 3:15 says that god's whole family on earth and in heaven derives its name from him. Ephesians 6:9 says god is everyone's master in heaven. Philippians 3:20 says that a Christ believer's citizenship is in heaven, not on earth. Colossians 1:5 says that hope is stored up in heaven for believers. 1Thessalonians tells us believers are waiting for god's son from heaven.

In Hebrews chapter 9, we are introduce to the idea that some earthly things are copies of heavenly things. The copies of the heavenly things were purified with blood sacrifices in an earthly sanctuary, which is a copy of the true heavenly one, by earthly priests. Christ entered the true sanctuary as the heavenly high priest to appear once and for all before god and offer himself as a sacrifice instead of an animal. Basically, everything on earth is supposed to be a kind of analogy, symbol, or shadow of the "real" things, which are in heaven. Believing this could lead to mental problems, in my opinion.

In 1 Peter 1:4, the reader is told an inheritance waits for him in heaven. In 3:22, Jesus is at god's right hand in heaven, with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.

At last we move on to Revelation. We should learn some good stuff about heaven there. Maybe? In Rev. 3:12 a new Jerusalem will come down out of heaven. Chapter 4 has a description of heaven, with a throne, a person on the throne who looked like he was made of jewels, with a jeweled rainbow encircling him. There were also 24 other thrones with 24 elders, dressed in white with crowns on their heads. Lightening and thunder came from the main throne. Seven lamps were burning in front of the throne, these were the seven spirits of god. Whoa! God has seven spirits? That's interesting. Not something you hear every day. There was also a sea of glass in front of the throne. "Around the throne were four living creatures" all covered with eyes. (Heaven is getting crowded) They looked like an ox, a lion, a man, and an eagle. They each had six wings and the never stopped praising the god who lives forever. Whenever the god was praised the 24 elders fall before the guy on the throne and lay their crowns in front  of him. Monotonous.

The description of what goes on in heaven continues on through chapter 5, where we see a scroll, angels, and a lamb with seven horns and seven eyes.(The seven eyes are also the seven spirits, just like the lamps.) There is more praising, worshipping, and falling down. In chapter six the lamb does stuff with the seals on the scroll from chapter six. It releases four horsemen, War, famine, Death, and Hades. Under an altar were some dead martyrs who complained they wanted to be avenged. They were given white robes and told to wait a bit. In chapter seven, more stuff happens with angels and people wearing white robes. In chapter 8, there was silence in heaven for half an hour. Then we get more angels, trumpets, thunder, lightening, fire, destruction of earth from heaven. Things go on in this vein until chapter 12 when a woman appears in heaven, clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and 12 stars on her head. A dragon also appears in heaven. He wants to eat the child the woman is about to have. The child was snatched up to god and his throne. Then there was a war in heaven between the angels and the dragon! It turns out the dragon was Satan! He is thrown to earth. As we go on, there are more angels, the lamb, more voices and signs from heaven, more symbolism, chapter after chapter. One thing is clear. We don't learn much, if anything about what heaven will be like for the multitudes of believers after all the battles are over. Yet.

More to come.

Thanksgiving break.

I just want to let my regular readers know I haven't gone away. I'm taking a break this week to get family things done. Expect another post on Friday. If you celebrate, I hope you have a happy Thanksgiving. Be sure to thank all the real people in your life, especially any one who works hard to make sure you have a good life. No gods required.

Heaven part ten

We are now at the book of John. Let's see if anything different is said about heaven. In John 1: 51, Jesus tells Nathaniel that because he believes, he will see heaven open and the angels of god ascending and descending on the son of man. This supposed future happening never happens in the bible.

In John 3:13, Jesus says that "No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven -- the son of man." This is presumed by christians to be Jesus himself. In 6:32-33, Jesus says, "It is not Moses who has given you bread from heaven (a reference to manna), but it is my father who gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of god is he who came down from heaven and gives life to the world." Again, this is presumed to be Jesus. This is confirmed in 6:38 where Jesus says, "I have come down from heaven...." None of the other gospel books have Jesus saying anything remotely like this. Verse 6:41-"I am the bread that came down from heaven." Verses 6:50-53, Jesus is the living bread that came down from heaven. The bread is his flesh. Anyone who eats of it will live forever. (Cannibalism!) By the way, in these passages, Jesus does not try to make this into a metaphor. He says his flesh is real food and his blood real drink. Those who eat and drink him have eternal life. The Catholics didn't just make up stuff when they insisted that they are actually eating Jesus's flesh during communion. They got it from the book of John.

We move on to Acts. In 1:9-11, Jesus was taken up to heaven (the sky) in front of the apostles. In Acts 3:21, Peter tells a crowd that Jesus must remain in heaven "until the time comes for god to restore everything." In 7:55-56, Stephen sees "heaven open and the son of man standing at the right hand of god. God has hands. In 9:3, Saul (Paul) sees a light from heaven (the sky) flash around him and hears god speak to him. In 10:11, Peter has a vision of heaven (the sky) opening and a large sheet with all kinds of animals being let down to earth. God also speaks to him.

We don't learn much more about heaven until we get to 1 Corinthians 8:5-6, where Paul says there is only one god, but even if there were "so-called gods" in heaven or earth, the people Paul is writing to only worship the one god the father and the one lord Jesus. In 1 Cor. 15:47-53, Paul says there was the first man made from  the earth and the second man from heaven. Paul's followers are currently earthly men, but in the future they will "bear the likeness of the man from heaven." Obviously Jesus. Paul goes on to say that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of god, nor does perishable inherit imperishable." No worries, they will all be transformed from the flesh in a flash, at the last trumpet. They will be clothed with the imperishable and will become immortal. What about the judgment and all that jazz?

In 2nd Corinthians 12:2, Paul boasts about his visions and revelations by telling about "a man" who was caught up to the third heaven or paradise. What is this third heaven? Apparently, there are many apocryphal stories and legends about this third heaven, but it is not mentioned anywhere else in the bible.

More to come.

Heaven part nine

We are still in Matthew. Matthew 22:1-14 is another parable about the kingdom of heaven. There is a king (god) who prepared a wedding banquet for his son (Jesus?). He sent out servants (prophets) to tell those who had been invited (Jews?) to come. They refused to come and treated the kings servants horribly. The king was furious. He destroyed the city (Jerusalem?) and decided to invite anyone who would come. However, he threw out the people who weren't properly attired in wedding clothes (Baptized?). Even though the king invited everyone, not everyone was chosen to remain at the banquet (heaven?). This was merely for not wearing the proper attire, not for poor behavior.

Matthew 22:30 tells us that "at the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage, they will be like the angels in heaven." Presumably, angels are sexless? Verse 23:22 says, "he who swears by heaven swears by god's throne and by the one who sits on it." Verse 24:36 tells us that not even the angels in heaven know when the end of the age is.

Matthew 25 gives us two more parables about the kingdom of heaven. One is about being ready for the coming of the bridegroom (Jesus?). Another is about giving the master (god) a good return for his investment in you. In Matthew 26:64, Jesus tells the disciples that in the future they will see "the son of man" (Jesus?) sitting at the right hand of the mighty one and coming on the clouds of heaven. In 28:2, an angel of the lord came down from heaven and rolled the stone away from Jesus's tomb.

Let's move on to Mark, which repeats a lot we've already covered. The spirit comes from heaven in the shape of a dove at Jesus's baptism. Jesus looks up to heaven while praying. The Pharisees ask for a sign from heaven, but there is no snarky answer this time. The kingdom of heaven belongs to child like people. In the afterlife, people will be like the angels in heaven. Not even the angels in heaven know the time of the end of the age. The disciples will see the son of man coming on the clouds of heaven. Last, Jesus was taken up into heaven, Mark 16:19, which is an addition. There are very few parables about the kingdom of heaven in Mark.

Next is Luke. There are many of the same uses of heaven as in Matthew and Mark, so I will only cover new ones. In Luke 2:15, angels go to heaven after speaking to shepherds about Jesus's birth. In 6:23, Jesus tells the disciples their reward in heaven will be great if they are mistreated. In 9:54, James and John offer to call fire down from heaven onto a Samaritan town for Jesus. (This is another thing I don't remember reading before.) In 10:20, Jesus tells the disciples not to rejoice because spirits submit to them, but to rejoice that their names are written in heaven. In 15:7, Jesus says there will be more rejoicing in heaven over the sinner who repents than over the 99 who do not need to repent. It pays to be bad so you can reap the benefits of repentance.

In Luke chapter 15 is the story of the prodigal son who is said to have sinned against heaven. Though how you can sin against the sky is a mystery to me. In 21:10, we learn that the end times will include great signs from heaven. In 21:26 one of the signs is the heavenly bodies will be shaken. In 22:43, an angel from heaven appeared to Jesus while he was praying, to give him strength. In 24:51, Jesus was taken up into heaven.

There certainly are a lot of angels in the New Testament. That's enough for today. Next time.

Heaven part eight

Continuing on with heaven in the New Testament:

In Matthew 18:18, Jesus tells all the disciples the same exact thing he told Peter in 16:19, that whatever he bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever he loosed on earth would be loosed in heaven. But what does the binding and loosing mean? Your guess is as good as mine. However it does show that binding and loosing is not specific to Peter.

Verses18:23-35 are another parable about the kingdom of heaven. (In the churches I've attended, parables were called earthly stories with a heavenly meaning.) This time the kingdom of heaven is like a king (obviously representing god) who wanted the servants (Jews, or everybody?) in debt to him to pay up. One man owed him a ton of money, so the king ordered that his whole family and all his possessions be sold. The servant begged for time to pay the debt. The king cancelled the debt. That servant went out and had another servant thrown in prison for owing him money that he couldn't pay. The king heard about it and scolded the servant for not showing the same mercy that was shown to him. The king had the servant thrown in jail and tortured (representing hell?)until he could pay back the original debt. "This is how my heavenly father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother from your heart."

There is so much wrong with this parable. First, we don't owe an invisible god in the sky any huge debt that we need to be forgiven of. Next, we do not need to fear what that god will do to us if we do not repay that nonexistent debt. Also, people have plenty of other reasons to forgive without threats of torture if they don't. Last, should we forgive everyone everything? Really? Or is it limited to debts owed? Certainly we should not be like Ebenezer Scrooge, but must we completely wipe out all debts when petitioned?

In Matthew 19:14, Jesus repeats that the kingdom of heaven belongs to people who are like children. In 19:21, Jesus tells a young man to sell his possessions and give to the poor to get treasure in heaven. What does one do with treasure in heaven? Verses 19:23-24 tells us it is incredibly hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. (Heaven is to be made up of the poor?)

Matthew 20:1-16 is another parable. It says the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner (god again) who hired men  (representing people, just males?) to work in his vineyard one day. He hired different people at different times of the day but at the end of the day they all received the same pay (representing their heavenly reward). The men who worked longer hours grumbled at the fact that the people hired later got the same pay. The landowner then claims the right to pay everyone exactly what he wants, it's his money to begin with. Should they be envious because he is generous? In the kingdom of heaven, the last will be first and the first will be last, whatever that means. One interpretation might be that the gentiles who were Yahweh fearers for much less time than the Jews would receive the same heavenly reward, and the Jews shouldn't grumble about it. There is so much ambiguous language in the bible, so many deepities, so much word salad. You could make it mean whatever you want.

More to come.

Heaven part seven.

We continue on trying to learn about heaven in the New Testament. I'm skipping passages that repeat what we've already covered. When we get to Matthew 11:11, we see that Jesus says he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than John the baptist. "From the days of John the baptist, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing and forceful men lay hold of it." Whatever that means.

In Matthew 11:23 of some translations, Jesus tells Capernaeum  it will not be exalted unto heaven but will brought down to Hades or Hell. Can a whole city go to hell? My NIV study bible says "lifted up to the skies"  instead of exalted unto heaven and "go down to the depths" instead of brought down to Hades. The Greek words are actually the ones for heaven and hades.

In Matthew 13:11, Jesus tells his disciples that the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven have been given to them but not to other people. Jesus deliberately speaks to the people in parables to  fulfill a prophecy in Isaiah that talks about people not understanding. The parables are about the kingdom (of heaven). "When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart." Seems kind of a dirty low down trick on Jesus's part.

In 13:24, Jesus tells a parable about the kingdom of heaven being like a man who sowed good seed in his field. Weeds planted by the enemy also grew there. They were left till harvest, then pulled up and burned. Presumably the man is god, the good plants are the good people, the weeds are the bad people. Guess who the enemy is.

In chapter 13, Jesus tells more parables about the kingdom of heaven. It is like a mustard seed that starts out tiny and grows to be the largest of garden plants, like a tree. (Except no mustard grows like that at all) The kingdom is like a a treasure hidden in a field that many are willing to sell everything to get. The kingdom is also like a net that catches all kinds of fish. The good will be kept and the bad thrown away. Jesus also says that "every teacher of the law who has been instructed about the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of the house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old." The implication seems to be that there are new teachings to add to the old.

In Matthew 16:1, the Pharisees and Sadducees ask Jesus for a sign from heaven. Jesus proceeds to tell them about signs in the sky for fair or foul weather. What we do not see in English is that the word sky here is the the same root word of heaven. This must be a kind of joke or play on words.

In 16:19, Jesus tells Peter, "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." This passage has been disputed by Christians the world over for more than a thousand years. I will not attempt to interpret it.

In 18:1 The disciples came to Jesus and asked who is the greatest in the kingdom of Heaven. Jesus replies, "unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greater in the kingdom of heaven." This is also a disputed passage. No one seems to be able to agree what it means to be like a little child. Jesus continues in 18:10 to say that the disciples are not to look down on children because "their angels in heaven always see the face of my father in heaven." This is very interesting. I've never heard this talked about before. It would appear that children have angels, does everyone?

More to come.

Heaven part six

We will now look at Strong's concordance's list of words translated as heaven and see if we can learn anything else about this mysterious place. Will it be in the sky like it was in the Old Testament? Or will it be in some other dimension outside of space and time, as many Christians claim?

Looking at the concordance, it again appears that the vast majority of the instances of the word heaven in the New Testament are one word. This is the Greek word Ouranos, which is defined as the sky; by extension- heaven (the abode of god); by implication- happiness, power, eternity. Specific to Christianity- its usage is air, heaven, the sky. There are a very few times other Greek words are used as heaven we will address them when we get to them.

We start with the book of Matthew. In verse 3:2, John the baptist tells people to repent for the "kingdom of heaven" is at hand. I ask myself, what is this kingdom of heaven? Was it mentioned in the Old Testament? So, I did a Bible Gateway search for the phrase kingdom of heaven and looked at the results. In the Old Testament, only the book of Daniel refers to anything like a kingdom of heaven, but it doesn't use that exact phrase. What's very interesting is that in the whole New Testament, the whole bible actually, the exact phrase "kingdom of heaven" is used only in the book of Matthew. Mark, Luke, John, and the rest of the New Testament, uses "kingdom of god." Only in 2 Timothy is there mention of a "heavenly kingdom."

In Matthew 3:17, at Jesus's baptism, a voice from heaven says, "This is my son whom I love, in him I am well pleased." In 4:17, Jesus begins preaching, "repent for the kingdom of heaven is near." In 5:3, the poor in spirit have the kingdom of heaven. So do the persecuted, in verse 5:10. In 5:16 god, called "the father", is in heaven.

Matthew 5:19 tells us, "Anyone who breaks the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commandments will be called great in the kingdom of heaven." What commandments is the author speaking of? Verse 5:18 tells that it is Law (of Moses). Jesus himself says in that verse that "until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest stroke a pen will by any means disappear from the Law. This is sooo NOT what most of Christianity teaches. But there it is. Not only that, Jesus goes on to say in verse 20 that unless a person's righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and teachers of the law, they will not enter the kingdom of heaven. This kingdom of heaven is exclusive and works based.

In Matthew 5:34, heaven is god's throne. In 6:19 we are told to store up treasures in heaven instead of on earth. Though how we do that is a mystery. In verse 7:21, we learn that not everyone who says "lord, lord," will enter the kingdom of heaven, "but only he who does the will of my father who is in heaven." Jesus is speaking, calling god his father.

In Matthew 8:11 Jesus tells a Roman centurion that, "many will come from the east and the west (from outside Israel), and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the subjects of the kingdom (Jews) will be thrown outside into the darkness..." Is this literal or figurative? Did Matthew believe that the Old Testament patriarchs are actually feasting in heaven? Is there food in heaven? Are there any women in heaven?

More to come.

Heaven part five.

We are now looking at the plural of heaven--heavens. Skimming through the references in Strong's concordance, it seems clear that the Ancient Israelites believed in multiple heavens in layers above the earth. Deuteronomy 10:14 says, "To the lord your god belong the heavens, even the highest heavens.." 1 Kings 8:27 says, "the heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain" god. The same is said in 2 Chronicles. Nehemiah 6 says Yahweh made all the heavens, even the highest heavens.

In Psalm 2, the one enthroned in the heavens laughs at the kings of the earth. In Psalm 18, Yahweh parted the heavens and came down, on dark clouds, with smoke pouring from his nostrils and fire from his mouth. "He mounted the cherubim and flew; he soared on the wings of the wind." Hail, thunder, and lightening, announced his presence. Pretty cool imagery. In a few Psalms, god is said to be above the heavens. In 68:4, Yahweh rides on the clouds in the NIV, he rides in the heavens in the KJV. The word translated clouds and heavens here is a totally different word, arabah,that usually refers to a desert, which is wierd. In 68:33, the NIV says Yahweh rides the ancient skies above. The KJV says he rides upon the heaven of heavens. Again, the word translated skies and heavens is the same root word shameh.

There are multiple passages in Psalms where the heavens praise Yahweh. They rejoice and declare his righteousness and glory. Many passages in the Old Testament with the word heavens are redundant. God made the heavens. The heavens are high. They have clouds, dew, rain, stars, birds, etc. Yahweh's right hand spread out the heavens in Isaiah 48:13.

I have come to a very interesting passage in Isaiah 66. It speaks of new heavens and a new earth. There will be no crying there. Infants will not die and people 100 years old will be thought young. They will be blessed and Yahweh will never harm them. This is specifically for the Israelites but Christians tend to co-opt it.

Jeremiah 10:11 tells us that the gods that did not make the heavens and the earth will perish from the earth and from under heaven, but not the god that made the heavens and the earth, Yahweh. (Sorry to break it to Yahweh, but his days are numbered as well.) When Yahweh thunders, the waters in the heavens roar, he brings the wind out from his storehouses.

In Ezekiel 1:1, the heavens opened and Ezekiel saw visions of god. After seeing a few surreal fantasy like creatures, at the end of chapter one Yahweh appears. He is sitting on a throne of sapphire. From the waist up he looks like glowing hot metal. From the waist down he was on fire. A brilliant light surrounded him and looked like a rainbow.  In Joel and Haggai, the heavens are shook. In Zechariah 6, four spirits of heaven, who stand in the presence of the lord of the whole world, look like chariots with horses. They head out to the east, south, north, and west, of course.

That's it for heaven/heavens in the Old Testament. What have we learned? The word/words heaven in the Old Testament are almost exclusively the same root  Hebrew word, shameh. That word is also translated as sky, air, and clouds in the NIV. Yahweh created the heavens/sky. He also lives there. (Where did he live before he created the heavens? ) At times he is said to be above the highest heaven or in the heaven of heavens. He's got a throne in the heavens and the earth is his footstool. From there he speaks, hurls lightening, sends hail, rain, dew, and winds which are stored there. Birds fly and clouds float in the heavens above. There are multitudes of spirit beings in heaven or the heavens which are often represented by the stars or are the stars, depending on which passage you read. One day there will be a new heavens and a new earth for the Israelites. I found nothing about people ever living an eternal life with god in heaven, if they believe in a messiah.

The New Testament is next.

Heaven part four

We are moving on to Lamentations 2:1, where we are told  that an angry Yahweh has hurled the splendor of Israel from heaven to earth. This is the same imagery of a falling star that was used to describe the king of Babylon, and is used to describe other kings in other places. It represents the idea that a person or persons have been brought low from their previous lofty heights.

Ezekiel uses the word heaven (shameh) to refer to the place where birds fly and the lights we see at night reside. When we get to Daniel, the word heaven changes to shamayin for the whole book. It still refers to both god's dwelling place and the physical space above the earth and is from the same root as shameh. The different word form may reflect change in word structure over the centuries. Daniel is one of the most recent of the Old Testament books.

In Daniel 2:28, Daniel tells King Nebuchadnezzar that there is a god in heaven who reveals mysteries. In verse 38, Daniel tells the king that the god in heaven has given him dominion and power and might and glory. (Sounds like flattery to me.) In verse 44, the god of heaven will set up a future kingdom that will never be destroyed. In chapter 4, the word shamayin refers to where the birds fly, and where treetops touch, and where dew comes from. In 4:13, a messenger, a holy one, comes down from heaven. In 4:31, a voice comes from heaven to speak to the king. At the end of chapter four Nebuchadnezzar praises the king of heaven.

It's interesting to note that while the KJV translates the words shameh or shamayin as heaven in most instances, the NIV switches up its translation. When the word occurs with birds, the NIV translates it as "air" or "sky." When the word is referring to very tall things, the KJV says they reach up to heaven. The NIV says they reach up to the sky. Still, it is all one and the same word. For the people of the Old Testament, it is clear they thought the heaven where god lived was  in the sky.

In Daniel chapter 7, Daniel is having a dream. In verse 2, he talks of the "four great winds of heaven churning up the great sea." In verse 13, he sees "one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven." In Daniel 8:10, Daniel has a vision of a goat with a horn that grew till it reached the "hosts of heaven, and it threw some of the starry host down to earth and trampled on them. It set itself up to be as great as the prince of the host." Later in chapter 8, Daniel hears the angel Gabriel interpret this vision. Each piece of the vision represents an historical earthly happening. The starry host seem to represent "the mighty men and the holy people," probably Jews. I'm thinking the prince of the host must be either the high priest or an exiled Jewish royal. Daniel's visions are not meant to be taken literally, but are symbolic. They are supposedly prophetic, but all indications are that they were written long after the events depicted.

In Amos 9:6, Yahweh "builds his lofty palace in the heavens." In Zephaniah 1:5, Jews are still bowing "down on the roofs to worship the starry host." In Malachi 3:10, Yahweh says that if the Jews tithe properly, he will "throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that (they) will not have enough room for it." This is the foundation of prosperity gospel. I bet a priest thought of it. Guess who benefits most from tithes?

That concludes all the Old Testament references for heaven in Strong's concordance, but I realized yesterday there is a whole other section for the plural "heavens," and it is still the exact same root. So, I will look over that to see if there are any other passages that can enlighten us further on heaven.

Heaven part three

We have been scanning the scriptures for information about heaven. I used Strong's concordance to find all the instances the word heaven is used. A lot of what I have found is redundant, so, I skim through looking for the unique passages that have bits about heaven that we haven't covered yet. We left off in Psalms.

 Proverbs 30:4 asks, "Who has gone up to heaven, who has come down?" This was written at a time when it was inconceivable to be able to leave the earth. It was also unknown that we live in solar system that inhabits a galaxy that is just one of billions of galaxies in a universe of which we have found no boundary.  Airplanes have flown up into the atmosphere and found no gods. The astronauts went up above the atmosphere and found no gods. Space probes have gone out into the solar system and found no gods. Space telescopes have plumbed the depths of the universe and found no gods.

Ecclesiastes 5:2 says,"...god is in heaven and you are on earth." Song of Songs does not mention heaven. In Isaiah 13, Yahweh is mustering an army that comes "from faraway lands, from the ends of the heavens...to destroy the whole country." On that day "the stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light."

In Isaiah 14:12, the king of Babylon is told, "How you have fallen from heaven, o morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of god; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. I will make myself like the most high." It is interesting to note that this passage has been associated with Satan in a round about way. The morning star mentioned is actually the planet Venus. In Latin, and hence in the Latin translation of the Old Testament, it was rendered as "lucifer", a lower case noun, not a proper name. In context, that is obviously not a reference a reference to Satan. It is also important to note that in many cultures kings were considered divine, gods in the flesh. More about this later.

In Isaiah 34, we read a rant against the nations. Yahweh is angry with them all and will take out his wrath on them. Verse 4 says, "All the stars of the heavens will be dissolved and the sky rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine...his sword has drunk its fill in the heavens." Isaiah 37:16 says that Yahweh is enthroned between cherubim. Isaiah 63:15 tells Yahweh to look down from his lofty throne in heaven. In Isaiah 66:1, Yahweh says, "Heaven is my throne, earth is my footstool."

In Jeremiah 7:18, Jeremiah speaks at the temple gate and says Yahweh is upset because the Israelites make cakes of bread for the "queen of heaven" and pour out drink offerings to other gods. In 8:2, Yahweh says the bones of Jerusalem's dead will be "removed from their  graves. They will be exposed to the sun and the moon and all the stars of heaven, which they have loved and served and which they have followed and consulted and worshipped." In 23:24, no one can hide from god because he fills heaven and earth. In chapter 44, Jeremiah received word from god about Jews living in various parts of Egypt. They are doomed for worshipping other gods, including the aforementioned Queen of Heaven. The people said it had been done for many generations by their forefathers, kings, and officials back in Jerusalem. They did not intend to stop.

It is clear from these passages that the Jews were not monotheists. Along with Yahweh worship, they also worshipped a female goddess and "the starry hosts" or "the hosts of heaven" which were heavenly bodies thought to be deities. This is called astrolatry. They believed the heavens or heaven to be filled with heavenly beings.

Heaven part two

We continue on with the mentions of heaven in the Old Testament. They are still all the same Hebrew root, shameh, which refers to all the space above us, the atmosphere and outer space. This same word is also referred to as god's dwelling place.

In 1 Kings chapter 8, Solomon prays to Yahweh in heaven above. He has built yahweh a temple and it is being dedicated. Solomon acknowledges that god won't really dwell on earth because even the highest heaven cannot contain him. Nevertheless, Solomon asks yahweh to hear the prayers of the people from his dwelling place in heaven. He wants Yahweh to watch over them from heaven. This is the same heaven that Solomon says is shut up when there is no rain. For Solomon, yahweh is in the same place that the rains come from.

In 1 Kings 22:19, we can read a passage about the "hosts of heaven." The prophet Micaiah is telling Ahab the king of Israel that "I saw the lord sitting on his throne with all the hosts of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left." Then Yahweh speaks to the hosts and asks them which one of them will entice Ahab into a war where he will be killed. One of the spirits comes forward and volunteers for the job of being a lying spirit in the mouths of the king's prophets. This conversation supposedly happened in the same heaven that is the space above the earth. Apparently there is a throne and a bunch of spirits up there, besides yahweh. Just how crowded is heaven?

In 2 Kings, fire comes down from heaven, Elijah goes up to heaven in a whirlwind, and the stars of heaven were worshipped by Ahab. It was all the same heaven. The same heaven is in 1st and 2nd Chronicles, and Ezra. In Nehemiah, 9:6, the multitudes of heaven worship Yahweh. In Esther, heaven is conspicuously absent.

In Job 11:8, the mysteries of god are higher than the heavens. In 16:19, Job says he has a witness in heaven. In 22:12, god is said to be in the heights of heaven. In 26:11, the pillars of heaven tremble at gods rebuke. Just to show you that the bible translators know the word heaven is the same as the sky, look at verse 35:11 which talks about "the birds of the air." That word translated as air is the same word, shameh. In the KJV, that very verse says "the fowls of heaven" instead.

Now we move on to Psalms 11:4, which says Yahweh is on his heavenly throne. In 14:2, Yahweh looks down from heaven on the sons of men. In 20:6, he answers his anointed from his holy heaven. In 78:23-26, "he gave a command to the skies above and opened the doors of the heavens. He rained down manna for the people to eat, he gave them the grain of heaven. Men ate the bread of angels; he sent them all the food they could eat. He let loose the east wind from the heavens...he rained down meat on them like dust..." Angels have bread! In 89:5-7, we read "the heavens praise your wonders o lord, your faithfulness too, in the assembly of the holy ones. (Yahweh is not the only one up there.) For who in the skies above can compare with the lord? Who is like the lord among the heavenLy beings? In the council of the holy ones, god is greatly feared; he is more awesome than all who surround him." Fascinating stuff.

Psalm 113 places yahweh even higher than the sky. It says "...his glory is above the heavens. Who is like the lord our god, the one who sits enthroned on high, who stoops down to look on the heavens and the earth." That's really high!

Heaven

I've already covered the topic of hell, so I thought we would do a survey of heaven in the bible. According to Bible Gateway, there are 622 times heaven/ heavens is used in the NIV, 691 in the KJV. It's important to note that it is probable that most of the instances are referring to the area above the earth, the atmosphere, or space. Sometimes that is indistinguishable from the residence of Yahweh.

Strong's concordance shows that through most of the old testament one single Hebrew word is translated into the English word heaven, most of the time. It is the word Shameh, which is defined as pertaining to the sky or the invisible arch in which the clouds move, as well as to the higher "ether" where the celestial bodies (planets) revolve.

This same heaven is the one created by god in Genesis, the one that contains the stars. This is the same heaven that let loose the flood waters that carried the ark. This same heaven is the one that rained fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah. This is the same heaven from which god spoke to Abraham. This is the same heaven to which Jacob's dream ladder reached. This is the same heaven that holds the stars and the dew. It's all the same word. There is no differentiation between the sky/upper atmosphere and the realm of god in the whole book of Genesis.

In Exodus, god talks to Moses from heaven. He sends manna to the Israelites from heaven. In Deuteronomy, god lives in heaven (the sky) and on earth. He speaks from heaven. Smoke and fire goes up to heaven. Rain comes down from heaven, etc. It's all one and the same heaven.

In Joshua, the lord threw stones down from heaven and the sun stood still in heaven. In Samuel, the lord thunders from the same heaven.

More to come.

Ecclesiastes wrap up

It seems clear to me that Ecclesiastes is not the cohesive writing of one person. It appears to be much like proverbs, with a variety of adages, saws, and sayings, some in poetic form, cobbled together with a poor attempt to create a unifying theme. Perhaps, at one time its core was simpler and made more topical sense. Then, some person, or persons, stuck in what they considered to be relevant at the time.

Is life meaningless or hopeful? Who lives longer, the wise man or the wicked? Does it even matter if you are wise or wicked? Who is better off, the living or the dead? Is our labor for nothing, or should we find satisfaction in it? It seems to depend on what verse you are reading.

As for doctrine, we find no heaven or hell, no reference to angels or demons or Satan, no miracles, and no prophecy of a messiah. The book does not claim to be inspired or the words of a god. It also does not mention any Old Testament people, places, or events. There was one reference to the Genesis creation of man, at the end of the book. The god spoken of in Ecclesiastes is not called Yahweh, but Elohim, the collective singular "the gods." This leads me to wonder if it is older tan the yahweh texts. At the end we do get a reference to judgment, but it was obviously added on and the form judgment takes is unclear.

There seem to be a battle in the text between the ideas that 1) There is nothing new under the sun,every single thing is meaningless, all effort is for nothing in the end, even trying to be wise, and 2) you can be happy in this life if you are god-fearing and get joy in  eating, drinking, and finding satisfaction in your work. Are they mutually exclusive? The god-fearing appears unnecessary to me, but number two gives us a more pleasant approach to life, even though I think happiness is a bit more complicated than that.

The "grave" mentioned in verse 9:10 is actually Sheol, which we have covered before. If you are new to the blog, click on the word sheol in the labels of this post to see more on that.

I found the book mostly boring and redundant, with a few interesting bits, especially the poetic description of old age.

What shall we do next?

As a reminder: I use the NIV for most scripture references, except when noted. The readings are generally taken at face value as much as possible, which is called a "plain reading." This is in the protestant tradition which teaches that each believer can study for themselves and understand what god wants them to know, without the necessity of an intermediary interpreting it for them. The church is supposed to be a priesthood of believers. Each person is supposedly given discernment by the holy spirit. This does not keep any or all from giving their own interpretation of what they read to others, and insisting that theirs is the correct one. I'm not doing anything different, I just don't believe any of it.

I also occasionally look at how a plain reading in modern language compares with original meanings found in Strong's concordance and interlinear scripture translations, found in the biblehub website. In addition,    I use Wikipedia as a general reference. It is good enough for general purposes. If I need to go in more depth, I try to find reliable sources by experts in their field. All opinions are my own and the words are original to me unless I reference someone else. However, I may have been influenced by those whose works I have read or listened to.

Ecclesiastes part twelve

We are now in chapter twelve, the last chapter. Verses 1-7 are a poem with the theme that you should remember your creator (presumably yahweh) in the days of your youth, before the troubles of old age creep up on you. The signs of aging are described in imaginative metaphors. They cover vision loss, muscle weakness, deterioration of posture, loss of teeth, loss of hearing, fear of heights, fear of dangers, white hair, loss of libido, and death. Death is given multiple metaphors: cords severed, bowls and pitchers and wheels broken. You should read it, it's quite amusing.

Then, after death,  "the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to god who gave it." This is a clear reference to the book of Genesis where god makes man out of the dust of the ground and breaths into him the breath of life. The "spirit" in this verse is not equivalent to a soul, or personal essence, but is referring to the breath, without which one is dead. God gave the breath, god takes it back when you are done with it. This poem is definitely of Jewish origin.

After the poem, "the teacher" again tells us that everything is meaningless. Three times.

From verses 9-14, we get a conclusion by someone who is not the teacher. After singing the teacher's praises and telling us how hard the teacher worked to find just the right words, the author tells us the collected words of the wise came from one shepherd, and the reader is to beware of anything in addition to them. This is one way the writers of the scriptures have tried to ensure the continuity and uniformity of believers, forbid them to read anything else.

Last of all, we are told that the whole duty of man is to fear god and keep his commandments. "For god will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil." That was obviously written by a different person than the one who wrote the first few chapters of Ecclesiastes. What is this judgment spoken of here? Before, the author moaned because everyone had the same end fate, both the wise and the wicked. There was no judgment, that's what he was complaining about. That's why he thought everything was meaningless.

Ecclesiastes part eleven

We continue on from chapter nine verse seven. The author is still in his "this is the best there is, so enjoy it" mood. Will he switch again to moaning how "this is all there is and it's not very fair to the wise" mode? For now, he tells us to heartily enjoy our food and wine. We should live happily with the spouse that we love "all the days of this meaningless life." "Your meaningless days" he says again, just to be sure you get the message. He says to do everything with all your might, because there is nothing to do in the grave. True words. But that's exactly what gives meaning to life.

Next is a small poem. "The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned (yes, sometimes it does.) but time and chance happen to them all." Now I feel like the author is not being completely honest here. He's probably not speaking in a literal sense of how life itself works. He's probably harping about there being no final reward, no afterlife where someone gives you a prize for doing well. "Moreover, no man knows when his hour will come." He doesn't even get a warning about when it will all end.

In verse thirteen, the author tells us he has a story about wisdom. A poor wise man saved a small city from invasion by a powerful king. This proves that wisdom is better than strength. Yet, no one remembers what the wise man did and they don't listen to him any more. Is that why wise people do things? For validation? Perhaps the truly wise man would be happy enough that his city was saved.

From 9:17, through all of chapter ten, there appears to be another collection of sayings or proverbs about the wise, the fool, the king, and more evils under the sun. Some of them are quite strange. According to the author, "the heart of the wise inclines to the right, the heart of the fool to the left." What does that mean?? He also says "A feast is made for laughter, and wine makes life merry, but money is the answer for everything." (?!) That sure contradicts many other bible teachings.

Chapter eleven continues on in the same vein, with proverbs that state the obvious or are meaningless (smile). The author also tells us we do not know the path of the wind or how a body is formed in a mother's womb. Well, he didn't know, but now we do. A wonderful thing called science has revealed these things to us. No gods needed.

Chapter eleven tells young men to be happy and follow the ways of their heart. But know that "God will bring you to judgment." What judgment? This must be a different author than the one who has told us again and again that when life is over that's it. The end of the chapter tells the young man not to worry, be happy, but it's all Meaningless. Erg.

One more chapter to go!

Ecclesiastes part ten

We are at chapter eight verse 2, and I don't mind telling you I am heartily sick of Ecclesiastes, but we will soldier on.

The next section has been given a title by the producers of the NIV, "Obey the King". Keep in mind that this book was supposedly written by the king. It starts off by telling the reader to obey the king because he took an oath before god. I didn't take an oath, did you? Who is he talking to? Then we are told to not be in a hurry to leave the king's presence, and to not stand up for a bad cause, because the king is going to do what he wants, no matter what anyone else says. 

Verses 5-8are in the form of a poem that tries to convince the reader he will come to no harm if he obeys the king. If the reader is wise, he will recognize that there is a proper time and procedure for everything, even if he is miserable. Then the author contradicts that in the next stanza to imply no one knows what the future holds or has power over it.

Next we have more stuff that the author saw under the sun: People lording it over others, only to hurt themselves; both wicked people and holy people being buried; sentences for crimes not being carried out quickly. Even though he sees wicked people living a long time, he knows it will go better for god fearing men. Because the wicked do not fear god, it will not go well with them and they will not live long. This is a blatant contradiction from one sentence to the next. It's like someone went through and  tried to fix the parts they disagreed with, without deleting the original.

The author changes his tune again in the next few verses: Righteous men get what the wicked deserve, and wicked men get what the righteous deserve. Of course it is all meaningless. So, the author recommends that everyone just try to enjoy life. Eat, drink and be glad. Then you will have joy, presumably in spite of all the unfairness and meaninglessness. 

Chapter eight ends by telling us that after the author applied his mind to know wisdom, he came to the conclusion that no one can understand all that god has done, or discover its meaning, not even a wise man. This thought continues on in chapter nine where we are told that what the righteous and wise do are in god's hands and no one knows whether love or hate awaits him!" At this point, I would think that most people should come to the conclusion that reading Ecclesiastes is an exercise in futility. This guy has already admitted, more than once, that everything is meaningless and not even a wise man can figure it all out, so everyone should just go enjoy their lives. What's he continuing on for then?

He's got to tell us again that every bloomin' person on the face of the earth, wise or fool, good or bad, clean or unclean, shares a common destiny. In case you don't know what that is, because he doesn't say yet, it's DEATH. That's the evil in everything, the destiny of all. (Notice there is no eternal reward for the good.) Any living thing is better off than the dead because it has hope. (Tell that to the fundamentalist Christians.) The next passage effectively destroys the doctrines of heaven and hell. "The living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even the memory of them is forgotten." Everything associated with them vanishes. "Never again will they have a part of anything that happens under the sun."