Ecclesiastes chapter 3 lists fourteen pairs of opposites, inluding "**a time to tear and a time to mend**". I have found one or more examples of most of the pairs elsewhere in the book, but can't find any for tearing or mending. For example, there are references to laughter, to mourning, to being born, to dying, to war and peace. I take chapter 3 as a sort of index into the rest of the book. For some of the words, I have to resort to emotional synonyms; there is no reference to dancing, but there are references to joy, and we dance when we are joyful. However, I can't find anything that I can match to clothing analogies like tearing and mending. Perhaps this is Solomon being silent about a touchy subject: > 10 Although he had forbidden Solomon to follow other gods, Solomon did > not keep the Lord’s command. 11 So the Lord said to Solomon, “Since > this is your attitude and you have not kept my covenant and my > decrees, which I commanded you, I will most certainly **tear the kingdom > away from you** and give it to one of your subordinates. 12 > Nevertheless, for the sake of David your father, I will not do it > during your lifetime. **I will tear it out of the hand of your son**. 13 > Yet I will not **tear** the whole kingdom from him, but will give him one > tribe for the sake of David my servant and for the sake of Jerusalem, > which I have chosen.” (1 Kings 11:10-13) Solomon makes a point of speaking about how unfair it is to leave your estate to someone who did not build it, and that person might not deserve it: > 18 I hated all the things I had toiled for under the sun, because I > must leave them to the one who comes after me. 19 And who knows > whether that person will be wise or foolish? Yet they will have > control over all the fruit of my toil into which I have poured my > effort and skill under the sun. This too is meaningless. (Ecclesiastes > 2:18-19) Given all that, I would expect some additional reference to tearing in Ecclesiastes, but can't find it. Maybe the Hebrew admits some clothing references that the English does not show? Or maybe Solomon is "on the nose" for once and eschews a parable?

In Ecclesiastes 1:4, it is mentioned that the Earth will remain forever: > A generation goes and a generation comes, But the earth remains > forever. But in 2 Peter 3:10, it is mentioned that the Earth will be burned up: > But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which > the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will > melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it > will be burned up. According to the Catholic Church, will the earth remain or will it be burned up?

From Ecclesiastes 7:16, >Do not be overrighteous, neither be overwise— why destroy yourself? So, why does the Bible say, "don't be *too* righteous"? Encouraging one to be moderate in their righteousness... Doesn't that seem a bit out of place?

I've noticed that Proverbs and Ecclesiastes have shockingly differing views of wisdom and knowledge: > “Her [wisdom and understanding personified] ways are pleasant ways and all her paths are peace.” (Proverbs 3:17) > > “Because in much wisdom there is much grief, and increasing knowledge results in increasing pain.” (Ecclesiastes 1:18) Clearly peace is not the same thing as grief, nor is pain the same as pleasant. Considering that there is no argument over that, what then make sense of these two verses. Can they both be true at the same time? Is wisdom and understanding a grievously pleasant and peacefully painful thing? Are we supposed to do the math and determine that wisdom is just average then in every regard? How can these two verses be understood so that they are both true, but can be in harmony with each other and not be a ridiculously obvious contradiction?

What does the following verse mean? > Do not be overrighteous, neither be overwise - Why destroy yourself? *(Ecclesiastes 7:16, NIV)* The Bible often asks us to be righteous (Psalm 106:3, Matthew 5:20) so why is Solomon's request contradicting with the other verses?

Do Catholic geologists still take seriously (as literal chronology) Eccles 1:4 "the earth abideth forever" which Saint Thomas Aquinas cites _inter alia_ in his discussion of God and eternity in _Summa Theologica_? >Accordingly, however, as some receive immutability from Him, they share in His eternity. Thus some receive immutability from God in the way of never ceasing to exist; in that sense it is said of the earth, "it standeth for ever" (Eccles. 1:4). (*Summa Theologica*, First Part, Question 10, Article 3 ) That is, does Catholic doctrine dictate that Catholic geologists must believe that the Earth is eternal and has existed forever? (This doctrinal question arose among comments to a different question that was put on hold as off-topic.)

I don't understand how these verses: > "Do not be quick with your mouth, do not be hasty in your heart to utter anything before God. God is in heaven and you are on earth, so let your words be few." - Ecclesiastes 5:2 > > "And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words." - Matthew 6:7 Can be reconciled with Luke 18:1-8 where Jesus gives a parable about praying with persistence. Is it possible to pray too much about something? Is it possible to pray continually yet with few words? What do other parts of the bible have to say on this issue?

How can humans become Angels if (Ecclesiastes 12:7) says "and dust returns to the ground it came from, and the Spirit returns to God who gave it" and (Ecclesiastes 3:20) "All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return."