Ecclesiastes 4.12 – the three fold cord
I was preaching last night on Ecclesiastes 4 and looking at various aspects of relationships ‘under the sun’.
- Oppression (v1-3)
- Envy (v4-6)
- Loneliness (v7-12)
- Bad leadership (v13-16)
I made a passing comment when looking at loneliness that I didn’t think the three fold cord of verse 12 was about marriage, nor the trinity. I’ve since realised I should have substantiated that comment.
Verses 7 and 8 are about the futility, the vanity of not having an heir to all the rewards of your toil. Verse 9 starts a different train of thought with the proverbial statement:
Two are better than one, because they have a good reward for their toil. (Eccl 4.9)
Like a lot of Ecclesiastes, the writer (who I refer to as Qohelet – a story for another day), makes a bold statement up front. He presents his conclusion and then goes on to justify it. It’s like a teacher who tells us the main point of the lesson at the beginning and then fleshes out what they mean by it.
What follows in v10-12 are three illustrations to support the main point of v9.
Three times Qohelet demonstrates that two are better than one. Maybe they are all illustrations of a road trip. As they travel and one falls, as they try to keep warm at night, or as they are set upon by another, it is better for there to be two rather than one. Maybe they are relating to the journey of life.
What does this have to do with a three fold cord?
Qohelet is talking about friendship, companionship or mateship. I don’t think this is referring in particular to a marriage situation. So I don’t think a three fold cord is two people plus God. There seems to be nothing in the context of the statement to suggest the particular relationship of marriage all of a sudden.
This is also why I don’t think it is about the trinity. There is no indication that the discussion has shifted to consider the relationships between the three persons of the trinity.
So, what does the statement ‘a threefold cord is not quickly broken’ relate to?
It seems like another proverb. Hence I think it most closely relates to the opening proverb of two being better than one. It builds on the argument that one on its own isn’t as good. Two are better, he says, and, as you know, cords of three aren’t quickly broken. ie a cord is strengthened when there are three. Now, I know nothing about cords and whether or not it is possible to do with four or more. I suspect maybe a mathematician or sailor could argue that any increasing odd number would be better than one. I certainly have never seen a cord of two. I don’t think you can plait two cords, so it wouldn’t make sense to refer to a two fold cord.
In some ways it’s another illustration from what we know of life, that the weight of numbers brings benefit.
I guess I don’t want to read into it, or any part of the Bible, things that aren’t there. Nor do I want to divorce a phrase or sentence from its surrounding context. If I think it makes sense where it belongs, then that’s more often than not, going to be my understanding.