Justification: The Depravity of Mankind The Preacher has concluded that this world has been subjected to vanity (Ecc 1:1 to Ecc 2:26); yet, God has a purpose for mankind, which can be called a plan of redemption (Ecc 3:1-15). He now seeks out God’s plan of justification for mankind in the midst of a depraved humanity, but first he must build a case for man’s need of redemption. Thus, in Ecc 3:16-22 he makes the conclusion that mankind is depraved. In Ecc 4:1 to Ecc 6:12 the Preacher uses illustrations from life and from creation to support his theme that all is vanity. In this section he discusses the overall condition of mankind in his fallen state of depravity and his need for redemption.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. The Preacher Concludes Man’s Depravity Ecc 3:16-22

2. The Preacher Explains His Conclusion Ecc 4:1 to Ecc 6:12

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Preacher Explains His Conclusion In Ecc 4:1 thru Ecc 6:12 the Preacher uses illustrations from life and from creation to support his theme that mankind is depraved. In this section, he discusses the overall condition of mankind in his fallen state of depravity. However, this time he makes his evaluation from the perspective of divine judgment.

We see a progressive order of events in this passage of Scripture. Man’s fall in the Garden of Eden resulted in his mortality. Mortal man became depraved by his sin. This depravity led man into a state of unrightousness. He now oppresses the weak, labours without rest, toils selfishly all the days of his life, and struggles to gain ascendancy over others. Thus, those who reach positions of power, wealth and leadership over others are no better than those they rule over. This is the Preacher’s way of reasoning with us to see his point of view that our mortal lives are full of vanity.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. The Vanity of Oppression on Earth Ecc 4:1-3

2. The Vanity of Toil on Earth Ecc 4:4-6

3. The Vanity of Selfish on Earth Ecc 4:7-12

4. The Vanity of Nobility on Earth Ecc 4:13-16

5. The Vanity of External Religion (Fear God) Ecc 5:1-7

6. The Vanity of Riches Ecc 5:8 to Ecc 6:12

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Vanity of Riches – There are two dangers to having riches. The first is that riches can easily cause the heart to become covetous, which is discusses in Ecc 5:8-20. Man’s covetousness results in wealth being accumulated through wicked means. The second vice is that men tend to find no rest and contentment after having accumulated wealth. This negative aspect of riches is discussed in Ecc 6:1-12. When men gain wealth by honorable methods, he is still in danger of falling prey to discontentment and failing to enjoy the life that God intended him to enjoy.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. Riches and covetousness Ecc 5:8-20

2. Riches without contentment Ecc 6:1-12

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Of the Vanity of Earthly Riches.

v. 1. There is an evil which I have seen under the sun, and it is common among men, it weighs heavily upon a great many unfortunate people;

v. 2. a man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honor, even to the point of luxury, all the highest gifts known to man here on earth, so that he wanteth nothing for his soul of all that he desireth, lacking nothing of things which are commonly considered most desirable by men, yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof, either on account of illness or by reason of excessive and oppressive cares, but a stranger eateth it, the heirs of such a man rioting and reveling in the enjoyment of the goods for which they did not labor; this is vanity, and it is an evil disease, it is like a severe illness which deprives a person of all joy in life.

v. 3. If a man beget an hundred children, the possession of a great many children being considered a most extraordinary blessing of the Lord, and live many years, In a long and happy life, so that the days of his years be many, the full sum allotted to men, and his soul be not filled with good, not having the satisfaction of a real enjoyment of God’s blessings in the status of a child of God, and also that he have no burial, being deprived of honor even in his death, this being considered a great disgrace in Oriental countries; I say that an untimely birth is better than he, it would have been better for him if he had never been born.

v. 4. For he cometh in with vanity, naked, poor, into an empty existence, and departeth in darkness, into a future which holds no hope for him, and his name shall be covered with darkness, assigned to utter forgetfulness and oblivion, in an unhonored death.

v. 5. Moreover he hath not seen the sun, he has never had any enjoyment of life, nor known anything, shut out from everything that might bring happiness; this hath more rest than the other, that is, the unborn child is less troubled with the annoyances of life than the miser.

v. 6. Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, more than twice as long as the oldest patriarchs from Adam to Noah, yet hath he seen no good, his own gloomy covetousness depriving him of any true enjoyment of life; do not all go to one place? for the realm of the dead is bound to receive all men without exception.

v. 7. All the labor of man is for his mouth, his chief concern in this life being the satisfaction of his hunger and of the sensual enjoyment of food, and yet the appetite is not filled, the soul is not satisfied, for a person living for this world only will never have his fill of sensual delights.

v. 8. For what hath the wise more than the fool? He who strives after real knowledge seems to have no advantage, according to outward appearances, over one who lives only for the satisfaction of his sensual nature. What hath the poor that knoweth to walk before the living? That is, What advantage has the wise person, who strives for true humility, who leads a quiet and retired life, over him who disregards all considerations of this kind and boldly lives for his own interest alone?

v. 9. Better is the sight of the eyes, the pleasant and sensible enjoyment of that which this life offers, than the wandering of the desire, when a person, dissatisfied with his lot, is ever planning something great for himself; this is also vanity and vexation of spirit, such restlessness and dissatisfaction brings only misery.

v. 10. That which hath been is named already, men have, in the past, inquired into its nature, and it is known that it is man, that is, man is vanity, all his vaunted greatness is nothing; neither may he contend with Him that is mightier than he, God being the absolute Sovereign of the universe, whom no one can withstand.

v. 11. Seeing there be many things that increase vanity, on account of the many trials, dangers, and changes of fortune with which man must contend, what is man the better? namely, in possessing wealth or the means for enjoying sensual delights.

v. 12. For who knoweth what is good for man in this life, all the days of his vain life which he spendeth as a shadow? How can any mere human being, himself subject to change and decay, decide just what special condition of fortunes will be most beneficial to him? For who can tell a man what shall be after him under the sun? The future of every person’s existence and fortunes is not in his own hands, but under the direction of God, to whom all believers will therefore entrust themselves, with all that they have, in childlike confidence.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

Ecc 6:1-6

Section 9. Koheleth proceeds to illustrate the fact which he stated at the end of the last chapter, viz. that the possession and enjoyment of wealth are alike the free gift of God. We may see men possessed of all the gifts of fortune, yet denied the faculty of enjoying them. Hence we again conclude that wealth cannot secure happiness.

Ecc 6:1

There is an evil which I have seen under the sun. The writer presents his personal experience, that which has fallen under his own observation (comp. Ecc 5:13; Ecc 10:5). And it is common among men. Rab, Translated “common,” like in Greek, is used of number and of degree; hence there is some doubt about its meaning here. The Septuagint has , the Vulgate frequens. Taking into account the fact that the circumstance stated is not one of general experience, we must receive the adjective in its tropical signification, and render, And it is great [lies heavily] upon men. Comp. Ecc 8:6, where the same word is used, and the preposition is rather “upon” than “among” (Isa 24:20).

Ecc 6:2

A man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honor. This is the evil to which reference is made. Two of the words hero given, “riches” and “honor,” are those used by God in blessing Solomon in the vision at Gibeon (1Ki 3:13); but all three are employed in the parallel passage (2Ch 1:11). So that he wanteth nothing for his soul of all that he desireth. “His soul” is the man himself, his personality, as Psa 49:19. So in the parable (Luk 12:19) the rich fool says to his soul, “Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years.” In the supposed case the man is able to procure for himself everything which he wants; has no occasion to deny himself the gratification of any rising desire. All this comes from God’s bounty; but something more is wanted to bring happiness. Yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof. “To eat” is used in a metaphorical sense for “to enjoy,” take advantage of, make due use of (see on Ecc 2:24). The ability to enjoy all these good things is wanting, either from discontent, or moroseness, or sickness, or as a punishment for secret sin. But a stranger eateth it. The “stranger” is not the legal heir, but an alien to the possessor’s blood, neither relation nor even necessarily a friend. For a childless Oriental to adopt an heir is a common custom at the present day. The wish to continue a family, to leave a name and inheritance to children’s children, was very strong among the Hebrewsall the stronger as the life beyond the grave was dimly apprehended. Abraham expressed this feeling when he sadly cried, “I go childless, and he that shall be possessor of my house is Dammesek Eliezer” (Gen 15:2). The evils are twothat this great fortune brings no happiness to its possessor, and that it passes to one who is nothing to him. An evil disease; , Septuagint, an evil as bad as the diseases spoken of in Deu 28:27, Deu 28:28.

Ecc 6:3

If a man beget an hundred children. Another case is supposed, differing from,the preceding one, where the rich man dies childless. Septuagint, , . “Sons,’ or “children,” must be supplied. To have a large family was regarded as a great blessing. The “hundred” is a round number, though we read of some fathers who had nearly this number of children; thus Ahab had seventy sons (2Ki 10:1), Rehoboam eighty-eight children (2Ch 11:21). Plumptre follows some commentators in seeing here an allusion to Artaxerxes Mnemon, who is said to have had a hundred and fifteen children, and died of grief at the age of ninety-four at the suicide of one son and the murder of another. Wordsworth opines that Solomon, in the previous verse, was thinking of Jeroboam, who, it was revealed unto him, should, stranger as he was, seize and enjoy his inheritance. But these historical references are the merest guesswork, and rest upon no substantial basis. Plainly the author’s statement is general, and there is no need to ransack history to find its parallel. And live many years, so that the days of his years be many; Et vixerit multos annos, et plures dies aetatis habuerit (Vulgate). These versions seem to be simply tautological. The second clause is climacteric, as Ginsburg renders, “Yea, numerous as may be the days of his years.” The whole extent of years is summed up in days. So Psa 90:10, “The days of our years are three score years and ten,” etc. Long life, again, was deemed a special blessing, as we see in the commandment with promise (Exo 20:12). And (yet if) his soul not filled with good; i.e. he does not satisfy himself with the enjoyment of all the good things which he possesses. Septuagint, “And his soul shall not be satisfied with his good.” And also that he have no burial. This is the climax of the evil that befalls him. Some critics, not entering into Koheleth’s view of the severity of this calamity, translate, “and even if the grave did not wait for him,” i.e. “if he were never to die,” if he were immortal. But there is no parallel to show that the clause can have this meaning; and we know, without having recourse to Greek precedents, that the want of burial was reckoned a grievous loss and dishonor. Hence comes the common allusion to dead carcasses being left to be devoured by beasts and birds, instead of meeting with honorable burial in the ancestral graves (1Ki 13:22; Isa 14:18-20). Thus David says to his giant foe, “I will give the carcasses of the host of the Philistines this day unto the fowls of the air, and to the wild beasts of the earth” (1Sa 17:46); and about Jehoiakim it was denounced that he should not be lamented when he died: “He shall be buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth beyond the gates of Jerusalem” (Jer 22:18, Jer 22:19). The lot of the rich man in question is proclaimed with ever-increasing misery. Ha cannot enjoy his possessions; he has none to whom to leave them; his memory perishes; he has no honored burial. I say, that an untimely birth is better than he (comp. Ecc 4:3). The abortion or still-born child is preferable to one whose destiny is so miserable (see Job 3:16; Psa 58:8). It is preferable because, although it has missed all the pleasures of life, it has at least escaped all suffering. The next two verses illustrate this position.

Ecc 6:4

For he cometh in with vanity; rather, for it came into nothingness. The reference is to the fetus, or still-born child, not to the rich man, as is implied by the Authorized Version. This, when it appeared, had no independent life or being, was a mere nothing. And departeth in darkness; and goeth into the darkness. It is taken away and put out of sight. And his (its) name shall be covered with darkness. It is a nameless thing, unrecorded, unremembered.

Ecc 6:5

It has seen nothing of the world, known nothing of life, its joys and its sufferings, and is speedily forgotten. To” see the sun” is a metaphor for to “live,” as Ecc 7:11; Ecc 11:7; Job 3:16, and implies activity and work, the contrary of rest. This hath more rest than the other; literally, there is rest to this more than to that. The rest that belongs to the abortion is better than that which belongs to the rich man. Others take the clause to say simply, “It is better with this than the other.” So the Revised Version margin and Delitzsch, the idea of “rest” being thus generalized, and taken to sights a preferable choice. Septuagint, , “And hath not known rest for this more than that”which reproduces the difficulty of the Hebrew; Vulgate, Neque cognovit distantiam boni et malt, which is a paraphrase unsupported by the present accentuation of the text. Rest, in the conception of an Oriental, is the most desirable or’ all things; compared with the busy, careworn life of the rich man, whose very moments of leisure and sleep are troubled and disturbed, the dreamless nothingness of the still-born child is happiness. This may be a rhetorical exaggeration, but we have its parallel in Job’s lamentable cry in Ecc 3:1-22. when he “cursed his day.”

Ecc 6:6

Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good. What has been said would still be true even if the man lived two thousand years. The second clause is not the apodosis (as the Authorized Version makes it), but the continuation of the protasis: if he lived the longest life, “and saw not good;” the conclusion is given in the form of a question. The “good” is the enjoyment of life spoken of in Ecc 6:3 (see on Ecc 2:1). The specified time seems to refer to the age of the patriarchs, none of whom, from Adam to Noah, reached half the limit assigned. Do not all go to one place? viz. to Sheol, the grave (Ecc 3:20). If a long life were spent in calm enjoyment, it might be preferable to a short one; but when it is passed amid care and annoyance and discontent, it is no better than that which begins and ends in nothingness. The grave receives both, and there is nothing to choose between them, at least in this point of view. Of life as in itself a blessing, a discipline, a school, Koheleth says nothing here; he puts himself in the place of the discontented rich man, and appraises life with his eyes. On the common destiny that awaits peer and peasant, rich and poor, happy and sorrow-laden, we can all remember utterances old and new. Thus Horace, ‘Carm.,’ 2.3. 20

“Divesne prisco natus ab Inacho,
Nil interest, an pauper et infima
De gente sub dive moreris,
Victima nil miserantis Orci.
“Omnes eodem cogimur.”

Ovid, ‘Met.,’ 10.33

“Omnia debentur vobis, paullumque morati
Serius aut citius sedem properamus ad unam.
Tendimus huc omnes, haec est domus ultima.”

“Fate is the lord of all things; soon or late
To one abode we speed, thither we all
Pursue our way, this is our final home.”

Ecc 6:7-9

Section 10. Desire is insatiable; men are always striving after enjoyment, but they never gain their wish completelywhich fortifies the old conclusion that man’s happiness is not in his own power.

Ecc 6:7

All the labor of man is for his mouth; i.e. for self-preservation and enjoyment, eating and drinking being taken as a type of the proper use of earthly blessings (comp; Ecc 2:24; Ecc 3:13, etc.; Psa 128:2). The sentiment is general, and does not refer specially to the particular person described above, though it carries on the idea of the unsatisfactory result of wealth. Luther translates strangely and erroneously, “To every man is work allotted according to his measure. Such an idea is entirely foreign to the context. And yet the appetite is not filled. The word rendered “appetite” is nephesh, “soul,” and Zockler contends that “‘ mouth ‘and ‘soul’ stand in contrast to each other as representatives of the purely sensual and therefore transitory enjoyment (comp. Job 12:11; Pro 16:26) as compared with the deeper, more spiritual, and therefore more lasting kind of joy.” But no such contrast is intended; the writer would never have uttered such a truism as that deep, spiritual joy is not to be obtained by sensual pleasure; and, as Delitzsch points out, in some passages (e.g. Pro 16:26; Isa 5:14; Isa 29:8) “mouth” in one sentence corresponds to “soul” in another. The soul is considered as the seat of the appetitive facultyemotions, desires, etc. This is never satisfied (Ecc 1:8) with what it has, but is always craving for more. So Horace affirms that a man rightly obtains the appellation of king, “avidum domando spiritum,” by subduing his spirit’s cravings (‘Carm.,’ Ecc 2:2. 9).

Ecc 6:8

For what hath the wise more fire than the fool? i.e. What advantage hath the wise man over the fool? This verse confirms the previous one by an interrogative argument. The same labor for support, the same unsatisfied desires, belong to all, wise or foolish; in this respect intellectual gifts have no superiority. (For a similar interrogation implying an emphatic denial, see Ecc 1:1-18 :30) What hath the poor, that knoweth to walk before the living? The Septuagint gives the verse thus: (A, C, ) ; , “For what advantage hath the wise man over the fool? since the poor man knows how to walk before life?” Vulgate, Quid habet amplius sapiens a stulto? et quid pauper, nisi ut pergat illuc, ubi est vita? “And what hath the poor man except that he go thither where is life?” Both these versions regard as used in the sense of “life,” and that the life beyond the grave; but this idea is foreign to the context; and the expression must be rendered, as in the Authorized Version, “the living.” The interpretation of the clause has much exercised critics. Plumptre adheres to that of Bernstein and others, “What advantage hath the poor over him who knows how to walk before the living?’ (i.e. the man of high birth or station, who lives in public, with the eyes of men upon him). The poor has his cares and unsatisfied desires as much as the man of culture and position. Poverty offers no protection against such assaults, But the expression, to know how to walk before the living, means to understand and to follow the correct path of life; to know how to behave properly and uprightly in the intercourse with one’s fellow-men; to have what the French call savoir vivre. (So Volok.) The question must be completed thus: “What advantage has the discreet and properly conducted poor man over the fool?” None, at least in this respect. The poor man, even though he be well vetoed in the rule of life, has insatiable desires which he has to check or conceal, and so is no better off than the fool, who equally is unable to gratify them. The two ‘extremities of the social scale are takenthe rich wise man, and the prudent poor manand both are shown to fail in enjoying life; and what is true of these must be also true of all that come between these two limits, “the appetite is not filled” (Ecc 6:7).

Ecc 6:9

Better is the sight of the eyes than the wandering of the desire (nephesh, “the soul,” Ecc 6:7). This is a further confirmation of the misery and unrest that accompany immoderate desires. “The sight of the eyes” means the enjoyment of the present, that which lies before one, in contrast to the restless craving for what is distant, uncertain, and out of reach. The lesson taught is to make the best of existing circumstances, to enjoy the present, to control the roaming of fancy, and to narrow the vast field of appetency. We have a striking expression in Wis. 4:12, by which is denoted the giddiness, the reeling intoxication, caused by unrestrained passion. The Roman satirist lashed the sin of unscrupulous greed-

“Seal quae reverentia legum,
Quis rectus aut pudor eat unquam properantis avari?”

(Juven; ‘Sat.,’ 14:177.)

“Nor law, nor checks of conscience will he hear,
When in hot scent of gain and full career.”

(Dryden.)

Zockler quotes Horace, ‘Epist.,’ 1.18. 96, sqq

“Inter cuncta leges et percontabere doctos,

Qua ratione queas traducere leniter aevum;
Num te semper inops agitet vexetque cupido,
Num paver et return mediocriter utilium spes.”

“To sum up all
Consult and con the wise
In what the art of true contentment lies:
How fear and hope, that rack the human will,
Are but vain dreams of things nor good nor ill.”

(Howes.) Marc. Aurel; ‘Meditat.,’ 4.26,

“Has any advantage happened to you? It is the bounty of fate. It was all preordained you by the universal cause. Upon the whole, life is but short, therefore be just and prudent, and make your most of it; and when you divert yourself, be always on your guard’ (J. Collier). Well is it added that this insatiability of the soul, which never leads to contentment, is vanity and vexation of spirit, a feeding on wind, empty, unsatisfying. Commentators refer in illustration to the fable of the dog and the shadow, and the proverb, “A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.”

Ecc 6:10-12

Section 11. All things are foreknown and foreordained by God; it is useless to murmur against or to discuss this great fact; and as the future is beyond our knowledge and control, it is wise to make the best of the present.

Ecc 6:10

That which hath been is named already; better, whatsoever hath been, long ago hath its name been given. The word rendered “already,” kebar (Ecc 1:10; Ecc 2:12; Ecc 3:15; Ecc 4:2), “long ago,” though used elsewhere in this book of events in human history, may appropriately be applied to the Divine decrees which predetermine the circumstances of man’s life. This is its significance in the present passage, which asserts that everything which happens has been known and fixed beforehand, and therefore that man cannot shape his own life. No attempt is here made to reconcile this doctrine with man’s free-will and consequent responsibility. The idea has already been presented in Ecc 3:1, etc. It comes forth in Isa 45:9, “Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?” (comp. Rom 9:20); Act 15:18 (according to the Textus Receptus), “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.” The same idea is brought out more fully in the following clauses. Septuagint, “If anything ever was, already hath its name been called,” which gives the correct sense of the passage. The Vulgate is not so happy, Qui futurus est, jam vocatum est nomen ejus, being rather opposed to the grammar. And it is known that it is man. What is meant by the Authorized Version is doubtful. If the first clause had been translated, as in the margin of the Revised Version, “Whatsoever he be, his name was given him long ago,” the conclusion would come naturally, “and it is known that he is man” (Adam), and we should see an allusion to man’s name and to the ground (adamah) from which he was taken (Gen 2:7), as if his very name betokened his weakness. But the present version is very obscure. Cox gives, “It is very certain that even the greatest is but a man, and cannot contend with him,” etc. But the Hebrew will not admit this rendering. The clause really amplifies the previous statement of man’s predetermined destiny, and it should be rendered, “And it is known what a man shall be.” Every individual comes under God’s prescient superintendence. Septuagint, , “It is known what man is;” Vulgate, Et scitur quod homo sit. But it is not the nature of man that is in question, but his conditioned state. Neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he. The mightier One is God, in accordance with the passages quoted above from Isaiah, Acts, and Romans. Some consider that death is intended, and that the author is referring to the shortness of man’s life. They say that the word taqqiph, “mighty” (which occurs only in Ezra and Daniel), is never used of God. But is it used of death? And is it not used of God in Dan 4:3 (3:33, Hebrew), where Nebuchadnezzar says, “How mighty are his wonders”? To bring death into consideration is to introduce a new thought having no connection with the context, which is not speaking of the termination of man’s life, but of its course, the circumstances of which are arranged by a higher Power. Septuagint, . With this we may compare 1Co 10:22, “Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he? ( ;).”

Ecc 6:11

Seeing there be many things that increase vanity. The noun rendered”things” (dabar) may equally mean “words;” and it is a question which signification is most appropriate here. The Septuagint has , “many words.” So the Vulgate, verba sunt plurima. If we take the rendering of the Authorized Version, we must understand the passage to mean that the distractions of business, the cares of life, the constant disappointments, make men feel the hollowness and unsatisfactory nature of labor and wealth and earthly goods, and their absolute dependence upon Providence. But in view of the previous context, and especially of Ecc 6:10, which speaks of contending (din) with God, it is most suitable to translate debarim “words,” and to understand them of the expressions of impatience, doubt, and unbelief to which men give utterance when arraigning the acts or endeavoring to explain the decrees of God. Such profitless words only increase the perplexity in which men are involved. It is very possible that reference is here made to the discussions on the chief good, free-will, predestination, and the like subjects, which, as we know from Josephus, had begun to be mooted in Jewish schools, as they had long been rife in those of Greece. In these disputes Pharisees and Sadducees took opposite sides. The former maintained that some things, but not all, were the subject of fate ( ), and that certain things were in our own power to do or not to do; that is, while they attribute all that happens to fate, or God’s decree, they hold that man has the power of assent, supposing that God tempers all in such sort, that by his ordinance and man’s will all things are performed, good or evil. The Sadducees eliminated fate altogether from human actions, and asserted that men are in all things governed, not by any external force, but by their own will alone; that their success and happiness depended upon themselves, and that ill fortune was the consequence of their own folly or stupidity. A third school, the Essenes, held that fate was supreme, and that nothing could happen to mankind beyond or in contravention of its decree (‘Joseph. Ant.,’ 13.5. 9; 18.1.3, 4; ‘Bell. Jud.,’ 2.8. 14). Such speculative discussions may have been in Koheleth’s mind when he wrote this sentence. Whatever may be the difficulties of the position, we Christians know and feel that in matters of religion and morality we are absolutely free, have an unfettered choice, and that from this fact arises our responsibility. What is man the better? What profit has man from such speculations or words of skepticism?

Ecc 6:12

This verse in the Greek and Latin versions, as in some copies of the Hebrew, is divorced from its natural place, as the conclusion of the paragraph, Ecc 6:10, Ecc 6:11, and is arranged as the commencement of Ecc 7:1-29. Plainly, the Divine prescience of Ecc 7:10, Ecc 7:11 is closely connected with the question of man’s ultimate good and his ignorance of the future, enunciated in this verse. For who knoweth what is good for man in this life? Such discussions are profitless, for man knows not what is his real goodwhether pleasure, apathy, or virtue, as philosophers would put it. To decide such questions he must be able to foresee results, which is denied him. The interrogative “Who knows?” is equivalent to an emphatic negative, as Ecc 3:21, and is a common rhetorical form which surely need not be attributed to Pyrrhonism (Plumptre). All the days of his vain life which he spendeth as a shadow. These words amplify and explain the term “in life” of the preceding clause. They may be rendered literally, During the number of the days of the life (Ecc 5:18) of his vanity, and he passeth them as a shadow. A life of vanity is one that yields no good result, full of empty aims, unsatisfied wishes, unfulfilled purposes. It is the man who is here compared to the shadow, not his life. So Job 14:2, “He fleeth as a shadow, and continueth not,” He soon passes away, and leaves no trace behind him. The thought is common. “Ye [Revised Version] are a vapor,” says St. James (Jas 4:14), “that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away.” Plumptre well quotes Soph; ‘Ajax,’ 125

“In this I see that we, all we that live,
Are but vain shadows, unsubstantial dreams.”

To which we may add Pind; ‘Pyth.,’ 8.95

.

“Ye creatures of a day!
What is the great man what the poor?
Naught but a shadowy dream.”

The comparison of man’s life to a shadow or vapor is equally general (comp. Ecc 8:13; 1Ch 29:15; Psa 102:11; Psa 144:4; Wis. 2:5; Jas 4:14). The verb used for “spendeth” is asah, “to do or make,” which recalls the Greek phrase, , and the Latin, dies facere (Cic; ‘Ad Attic.,’ 5.20. 1); but we need not trace Greek influence in the employment of the expression here. For who can tell a man what shall be after him under the sun? This does not refer to the life beyond the grave, but to the future in the present world, as the words, “under the sun,” imply (comp. Ecc 3:22; Ecc 7:14). To know what is best for him, to arrange his present life according to his own wishes and plans, to be able to depend upon his own counsel for all the actions and designs which he undertakes, man should know what is to be after him, what result his labors will have, who and what kind of heir will inherit his property, whether he will leave children to carry on his name, and other facts of the like nature; but as this is all hidden from him, his duty and his happiness is to acquiesce in the Divine government, to enjoy with moderation the goods of life, and to be content with the modified satisfaction which is accorded to him by Divine beneficence.

HOMILETICS

Est 6:1-6

Sore evils beneath the sun; or, the misfortunes of a rich man.

I. A RICH MAN WITHOUT THE CAPACITY OF ENJOYMENT.

1. A frequent occurrence. The picture that of one who has attained to great wealth, power, and honor, who has been conscious of large ambitions and has realized them, who has been filled with insatiable desires and possessed the means of gratifying them, and yet has been unable to extract from all his possessions, pleasures, and pursuits any grain of real and solid happiness.

2. A sorrowful experience. The Preacher characterizes it as an evil which lies heavy upon men. Upon the individual himself, whose hopes are disappointed and plans frustrated, whose riches, wealth, and honors thus become mocking decorations rather than real ornaments, and Whose pleasures and. gratifications turn into apples of Sodom rather than prove, as he expected they would do, grapes of Eshcol.

3. An instructive lesson. The valuable truth that the soul’s happiness is not, and cannot be, found in any creatures, however excellent, but only in God (Psa 37:4), is thus forcibly pressed home upon the hearts and consciences of rich men themselves, and of such as observe the experiences through which they pass.

II. A RICH MAN WITHOUT AN HEIR TO HIS WEALTH. A great diminution to the rich man’s happiness, who, in having no son or child, lacks:

1. That which is dearer to the heart of man than wealth, power, or fame. Unless the instincts of human nature have been utterly perverted by avarice, covetousness, and ambition, the hearts of rich no less than of poor men cling to their offspring, and, rather than lose these by death, would willingly surrender all their wealth (2Sa 18:33).

2. That without which wealth and honor lose the greater part of their attractions. Abraham felt it a considerable detraction from the sweetness of Jehovah’s promise that he had no heir, and that all his possessions would ultimately pass into the hands of his steward, Eliezer of Damascus (Gen 15:1-3).

3. That which gives to wealth-gathering and power-seeking their best justification. It is not certain that anything will justify these when inordinate; if anything will excuse a man for heaping up wealth in an honest and legitimate way, and for endeavoring to acquire power and influence amongst his fellows, it is the fact of his doing so with a view to promote the happiness of those God has made dependent on him, and bound to him by the ties of natural affection.

III. A RICH MAN WITHOUT A TOMB FOR HIS CORPSE. (For a different rendering of this clause, “And moreover he have no’ burial,” see the Exposition.)

1. The case supposed. That of a rich man surrounded by many (an hundred) children, who lives long, but has no true enjoyment of his good fortune, and when he dies is denied the glory of a funeral such as Dives doubtless had (Luk 16:22), and the shelter of a grave such as was not withheld even from Lazarus. How he should come at last to have no burial, though not explained, may be supposed to happen either through the meanness of his relatives or their hatred of him, or through his perishing in such a way (e.g. in war, at sea, through accident, by violence) as to render burial by his children impossible. Commentators cite as an illustration of the case supposed the murder by Bagoas of Artaxerxes Ochus, whose body was thrown to the cats. Another may be that of Jehoiakim, of whom it was predicted (Jer 22:19), “He shall be buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth beyond the gates of Jerusalem.”

2. The judgment pronounced. That such a case is not to be compared in respect of felicity with that of “an untimely birth,” which “cometh in vanity, and departeth in darkness, and the name thereof is covered with darkness;” i.e. which enters on a lifeless existence when born, and “is carried away in all quietness, without noise or ceremony,” having received no name, and becoming forgotten as if it had never been (Delitzsch). The grounds on which the Preacher rests his judgment are three:

(1) that an untimely birth never sees the sun, and so escapes all sight of and contact with the sufferings and miseries of earth;

(2) that it never wakes to the exercise of intelligence, and so is never conscious of either the wickedness or the woe that is surging around it; and

(3) that it rests better in the grave to which it goes than does the corpse of the joyless rich man.

3. The correction needed. This pessimistic view of life may be thus admirably qualified. The allegation here made “contains a thought to which it is not easy to reconcile one’s self. For supposing that life were not in itself, as over against non-existence, a good, there is yet scarcely any life that is absolutely joyless; and a man who has become the father of a hundred children has, as it appears, sought the enjoyment of life principally in sexual love, and then also has found it richly. But also, if we consider his life less as relating to sense, his children, though not all, yet partly, will have been a joy to him; and has a family life so lengthened and rich in blessings only thorns, and no roses at all? And, moreover, how can anything be said of the rest of an untimely birth, which has been without motion and without life, as of a rest excelling the termination of the life of him who has lived long, since rest without a subjective reflection, a rest not felt, certainly does not fall under the point of view of more or less good or evil? The saying of the author on no side bears the probe of exact thinking” (Delitzsch).

IV. A RICH MAN WITHOUT A BETTER LOT THAN HIS NEIGHBORS. “Do not all go to one place?” In the grave rich and poor differ not. The dusts of the patrician and of the plebeian, freely intermingled, no human chemistry can distinguish. A tremendous humiliation, no doubt, to human pride, that Solomon and the harlot’s child, Caesar and his slave, Dives and Lazarus, must ultimately lie together in the same narrow housethat rich and poor, wise and unwise, powerful and powerless, honored and abject, kings and subjects, princes and peasants, masters and servants, must ultimately sleep side by side on the same couch; but so it is. And this, also, in the eyes of worldlings, but not of good men, is a vanity, and a sore evil beneath the sun.

LESSONS.

1. Riches are not the chief good.

2. Temporal evils may be sources of spiritual good.

Est 6:7-9

The insatiableness of desire.

I. IT CONSUMES THE LABOR OF ALL. “All the labor of man is for his mouth, and yet the appetite is not filled” (Est 6:7). The appetite, as an imperious master, urges on the soul to labor with all its powers and energies to furnish food for its delectation; and yet the utmost man can provide is insufficient to fill its capacious maw. However varied man’s works may be, they have all this end in common, to appease the hunger of the sensuous nature; and all alike fail in reaching it. The appetite grows by what it feeds on, and hence never cries, “Enough!”

II. IT AFFECTS THE CHARACTERS OF ALL. “What advantage hath the wise more than the fool? or what [advantage] hath the poor man, who knows to walk before the living, over the fool?” (Est 6:8).

1. Intellectual gifts do not argue the absence of desire. The philosopher, no less than the peasant, is under its dominion. The former may attempt to control, and may even to some extent succeed in controlling, his bodily appetites; but the appetite is there, impelling him to labor equally with the fool.

2. Material poverty does not guarantee the absence of desire. The poor man who knows how to walk before the living, i.e. who understands the art of living, is no more exempt from its sway than is the rich man, though a fool. The poor man may have learned how to put restraints upon himself, because of inability to gratify his desire, but the appetite is as much felt by him as by his rich neighbor.

III. IT DISAPPOINTS THE HOPES OF ALL. “Better is the sight of the eyes than the wandering of the desire” (Est 6:9). Just because desire is never satisfied, it wanders on in pursuit of other objects which are often visionary, and almost always illusory; as a consequence, like the dog which snapped at his shadow and lost the meat he carried in his mouth, desire frequently misses such enjoyments as are within its reach through striving after those that are beyond its power.

LESSONS.

1. The danger of self-indulgence.

2. The difficulty of keeping the lower nature in subjection.

3. The propriety of preferring present and possible to future and perhaps impossible enjoyments.

Est 6:10-12

Four aspects of human life.

I. MAN AS A CREATURE OF DESTINY. “Whatsoever hath been, the name thereof was given long ago, and it is known that it is man” (Est 6:10); or, “Whatsoever he be, his name was given him long ago, and it is known that he is man”; or, “That which hath been, its name hath long ago been named; and it is determined what a man shall be” (Delitzsch, Wright). These different readings suggest three thoughts.

1. That man‘s appearance upon the earth had been long ago foreseen. The sentiment holds good of man collectively or individually, i.e. of the race, or of the unit in the race. Neither did “man” originally spring into being by a happy accident, without the direct or indirect cognizance of God, nor does the “individual” so arrive upon the scene of time; but both the hour and the manner of man’s arrival upon the globe, and of each individual’s birth, were prearranged from eternity by him who “made the earth, and created man upon it” (Isa 45:12), and who “giveth to all life and breath and all things” (Act 17:25).

2. That man‘s character as a creature had been long ago foreknown. In this respect, indeed, he had in no way differed from other creatures. Known unto God had been all his works from the beginning of the world (Act 15:18). Human character is not in any instance an accidental product of blind forces, but is determined by fixed laws, moral and spiritual, which have been prearranged and instituted by the supreme moral Governor. Hence, within limits, it is possible for man to predict what himself or another shall become. “He that doeth righteousness” not only “is righteous” in the sense of already possessing the fundamental and essential principle of righteousness, viz. faith in, love of, and submission to God, but his righteousness shall eventually become within him the all-pervading and permanent quality of his being; and similarly “he that doeth unrighteousness” not only is potentially, but shall become permanently, unrighteous. Moral character in all men tends to fixity, whether of good or evil. Hence the greater possibility, amounting to certainty, that the Divine Mind, whose creation the laws are under which these results are wrought out, can, ab initio, foresee the issue to which, in every separate instance, they lead.

3. That man‘s destiny as an individual had been long ago determined, The doctrine of Divine predestination, however hard to harmonize with that of human freedom, is clearly revealed in Scripture (Exo 9:16; 2Ch 6:6; Psa 135:4; Isa 44:1-7; Jer 1:5 . Mat 11:25, Mat 11:26; Joh 6:37; Rom 8:29; Rom 9:11), and is supported by the plain testimony of experience, which shows that

“There’s a divinity that shapes our ends,
Rough-hew them how we will.”

(‘Hamlet.’)

Or, in the words of Caesar, that nothing

“Can be avoided

Whose end is purposed by the mighty gods.”

(‘Julius Caesar.’)

II. MAN AS THE POSSESSOR OF FREE–WILL. “Neither may [or, ‘can’] he contend with him that is mightier than he” (Est 6:10); in which are contained the following thoughts:

1. That mighty as man is (in virtue of his free-will), there is a mightier than he. That mightier is not death (Plumptre), but God (Delitzsch), who also is a Being possessed of free-will, which must still less be interfered with by man’s choices and intentions, than man’s free-win must be impaired by God’s purposes and plans. This thought frequently forgotten, that if man, in virtue of his free-will, must be able to carry out his volitions, much more must God be able to carry out the free decisions of his infinite mind. In this concession the whole doctrine of predestination, or election, is involved.

2. That if in any instance man‘s purposes and God‘s come into collision, these of man must give way. One has only to put the question, whether it is of greater moment that God’s purposes with regard to the universe and the individual should be carried out, or that man’s with regard to himself should, to perceive the absurdity of limiting the Divine sovereignty in order to avoid the appearance of restricting human freedom, rather than seeming to impair human freedom in order to preserve intact the absolute and entire supremacy of God.

3. That God‘s determinations, when accomplished, will not be impeachable by man. The veil of mystery now shrouding the Divine procedure will in the end be in great measure, perhaps wholly, uplifted, and man himself constrained to acknowledge that the supreme Ruler hath done all things well (Mar 7:37).

III. MAN AS A VICTIM OF IGNORANCE. “Seeing there be many things [or, “words that increase vanity,”] what is man the better? For who knoweth,” etc.? and “who can tell?” (Est 6:11, Est 6:12).

1. The fact of his ignorance. Elsewhere in Scripture explicitly asserted (Deu 32:28; Psa 14:4; Pro 19:3; Joh 1:5; Eph 4:18), and abundantly confirmed by experience.

2. The extent of his ignorance. Restricting attention to the Preacher’s words, two subjects may be noted concerning which manapart, i.e; from God and religionis comparatively unenlightened:

(1) the supreme good (Psa 4:6), which he places now in pleasure, now in possessions, now in philosophy, now in power, never in God; and

(2) the future, which is to him so much a sealed book that he cannot tell what a day may bring forth (Pro 27:1), and far less “what shall be after him under the sun.”

3. The strangeness of his ignorance. Considering that man is a being possessed of high natural endowments, and is often much and earnestly engaged in searching after knowledge. That with all his lofty capacity, and devotion to intellectual pursuits, he should, it’ left to himself, be unable to tell either what is good for man in this life (all his discussions upon this subject having been little else than words, words, words), or how the course of events shall shape itself when he has passed from this earthly scene, is a surprising phenomenon which calls for examination.

4. The explanation of his ignorance lies in two things:

(1) in the natural limitation of his faculties, which are finite, and not infinite; and

(2) in the moral depravation of his faculties, which are nosy those not of an unfallen, but of a fallen, being.

IV. MAN AS A DENIZEN OF EARTH.

1. His continuance is not permanent. He and his generation shall pass on, that those coming after may enter in and take possession (Ecc 1:4).

2. His days are not many. His life he spendeth like a shadow, which has no substance, and abides not in one stay. “Man that is born of a woman is of few days,” etc. (Job 14:1, Job 14:2).

3. His life is not good. Apart from God and religion it is “vain,” i.e. empty of real happiness, and. destitute of solid worth.

LESSONS.

1. The sovereignty of God.

2. The weakness of man.

3. The duty of submission to the Supreme.

4. The inability of earthly things to make man better.

5. The chief good for man on earth is God.

Est 6:12

Who can tell? a sermon on human ignorance.

I. THINGS THAT LIE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE.

1. The nature of the duty. “Can thou by searching find out God,” etc.? (Job 11:7). To define God as Spirit (Joh 4:24), to characterize him as Love (1Jn 4:8, 1Jn 4:16) or as Light (1Jn 1:5), to ascribe to him attributes of omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience, etc; is not so much to explain his essence as to declare it to be something that lies beyond the bounds of our finite understanding (Psa 139:6).

2. The mystery of the Incarnation. “Great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh” (1Ti 3:16). To show that Jesus Christ must have been “Emmanuel, God with us” (Mat 1:23), may not surpass the powers of man; to give an adequate exhibition of the way in which in Christ the human and Divine natures were and are united does. The best proof of this lies in the number of the theories of the Incarnation.

3. The contents of the atonement. That Christ, as a matter of fact, bore the sins of men so as to expiate their guilt and destroy their power, one can tell from the general tenor of Scripture declarations on the subject (Mat 26:28; Rom 3:24; 2Co 5:21; 1Ti 2:6; 1Pe 2:24; 1Jn 2:2); but what it was in Christ’s “obedience unto death” that constituted the propitiation is one of those “secret things” that belong to God.

4. The movements of the Spirit. “Thou canst not tell whence it [the wind] cometh, or whither it goeth; so is every one that is born of the Spirit” (Joh 3:8). That the Holy Spirit is the Author of regeneration and of inspiration is perfectly patent to the understanding of the Christian. The theory that shall adequately explain how the Spirit renews or inspires the soul has not yet been elaborated.

5. The events of the future. “Who can tell a man what shall be after him under the sun?” or even what shall be on the morrow (Pro 27:1)?

II. THINGS THAT LIE WITHIN THE SCOPE OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE.

1. The character of God. The Ninevites could not tell whether Jehovah would be gracious to them (Jon 3:9); we can tell from the revelation of Scripture, and especially from the teaching of Christ, that God is Love, and willeth not the death of any.

2. The Divinity of Christ. Human reason is perfectly competent to decide upon the question whether Jesus of Nazareth belonged to the category of common men, or whether he was a new order of man broken in upon the ordinary line of the race. The evidence for such a decision has been provided, and any one who seriously wishes can arrive at a just conclusion.

3. The work of the Savior. This also has been fully discovered in the Scripture. Christ came to reveal the Father (Joh 14:9), to atone for sin (Matt, 20:28), to exemplify holiness (1Pe 2:21), and to establish the kingdom of heaven upon earth (Rev 1:6).

4. The fruits of the Spirit. If a man cannot always judge whether the Spirit is in his own or another’s heart, he should be at no loss to tell whether the Spirit’s fruits, which are love, joy, peace, etc. (Gal 5:22), are discernible in his or his neighbor’s life.

5. The goals of the future. If the separate incidents that shall hereafter occur in any individual’s life be concealed from view, the two termini, towards one or other of which every individual is movingheaven or hellhave been clearly revealed.

HOMILIES BY D. THOMAS

Est 6:1, Est 6:2

The unsatisfactoriness and transitoriness of earthly good.

Men are prone to be guided, in the conclusions they form regarding human life, by their own personal experience, and by the observations they make in their own immediate circle of acquaintance. So judging, they are prone to be one-sided in their estimate, and to take a view either too gloomy or too roseate. The author of Ecclesiastes was a man who had very large and varied opportunities of studying mankind, and who was in the habit of forming impartial conclusions. This accounts for what may perhaps seem to some readers opposed and inconsistent representations of the nature of man’s life on earth. In fact, a more definite and decisive representation would have been less correct and fair.

I. MEN LOOKING UPON THEIR FELLOW–MEN ARE PRONE TO GIVE TOO LARGE A MEASURE OF ATTENTION TO THEIR OUTWARD CIRCUMSTANCES. The first question that occurs to many minds, upon forming a new acquaintance, isWhat has he? i.e. what property? orWhat is he? i.e. what is his rank in society? A man to whom God has given riches, wealth, and honor, who lacks nothing for his soul of all that he desireth, is counted fortunate. He is held in esteem; his friendship and favor are cultivated.

II. REFLECTING OBSERVERS BEAR IN MIND THAT THERE ARE OTHER ELEMENTS IN HUMAN WELFARE. For instance, it cannot be questioned that health of body and a sound and vigorous mind are of far more importance than wealth. And there may be family trouble, which mars the happiness of the most prosperous. The wise man had observed cases in which there was no power to enjoy the gifts of Providence; and other cases in which there were no children to succeed to the possession of accumulated wealth, so that it came into the hands of strangers. Bodily affliction and domestic disappointment may cast a shadow over the lot which seems the fairest and most desirable. “This is vanity, and it is an evil disease.”

III. THESE IMPERFECTIONS IN THE HUMAN LOT OFTEN GIVE RISE TO MELANCHOLY REFLECTIONS AND DISTRESSING DOUBTS. Those who not only remark what happens around them, but reflect upon what they witness, draw inferences which have a certain semblance of validity. If we judge only by the facts which come under our cognizance, we may be led to conclusions inconsistent with true religion Men come to doubt the rule of a benevolent Governor of the universe, simply because they cannot reconcile certain facts with such convictions as Christianity encourages. Skepticism and pessimism often follow upon bitter experiences and upon frequent contact with the calamities of this mundane state.

IV. WISDOM SUGGESTS A REMEDY FOR SUCH DIFFICULTIES AND DOUBTS.

1. It should be remembered that what any individual observes is but an infinitesimal part of the varied and protracted drama of human life and history.

2. It should not be lost sight of that there are moral and spiritual purposes in our earthly existence. It is a discipline, a proving, an education. Its end is notas men too often suppose that it should beenjoyment and pleasure; but characterconformity to the Divine character, and submission to the Divine will. The highest benevolence aims at the highest ends, and to secure these it seems in many cases necessary that lower ends should be sacrificed. If temporal prosperity be marred by what seems misfortune, this may be in order that spiritual prosperity may be promoted. It may not be well for the individual that he should be encouraged to seek perfect satisfaction in the things of this world. It may not be well for society that great and powerful families should be built up, to gratify human pride and ambition. God’s ways are not as our ways, but they are wiser and better than ours.T.

Est 6:3-6

The gloom of disappointment.

The case supposed in these verses is far more painful than that dealt with in the preceding passage. It is now presumed that a man not only lives to an advanced age”a thousand years twice told”but that he begets “a hundred children.” Yet he is unsatisfied with the experience of life, and dies without being regretted and honorably buried. And in such a case it is affirmed that the issue of life is vanity, and that it would have been better for such a one not to have been born. It must be borne in mind, when considering this melancholy conclusion, that it is based entirely upon what is earthly, visible, and sensible.

I. HERE IS AN EXAGGERATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF OUTWARD PROSPERITY AND OF WORLDLY PLEASURE. The standard of the world may be a real one, but it is far from being the highest. Wealth, long life, important family connections, are good things; but they are not the best. Much of human unhappiness arises from first overestimating external advantages, and then, as a natural consequence, when these are lost, attaching undue importance to the privation. If men did not exaggerate the value of earthly good, they would not be so bitterly disappointed, so grievously depressed, upon losing it.

II. HERS IS AN UNWARRANTABLE EXPECTATION OF SATISFACTION WITH WHAT EARTH CAN GIVE. Of the person imagined it is assumed “that his soul be not filled with good.” The fact is that men seek satisfaction where it is not to be found, and in so doing prove their own folly and short-sightedness. God has given to man a nature which is not to be satisfied with the enjoyments of sense, with the provision made for bodily appetite, with the splendor, luxury, and renown, upon which men are so prone to set the desires of their hearts. If what this world can give be accepted with gratitude, whilst no more is expected from it than reason and Scripture justify us in asking, then disappointment will not ensue. But the divinely fashioned and immortal spirit of man cannot rest in what is simply intended to still the cravings of the body, and to render life tranquil and enjoyable.

III. HERE IS MOROSE DISSATISFACTION RESULTING FROM FAILURE TO SOLVE AN INSOLUBLE PROBLEM. Apply the hedonistic test, and then it may be disputed whether the sum of pain and disappointment is not in excess of the sum of pleasure and satisfaction; if it is, then the “untimely birth” is better than the prosperous voluptuary who fails to fill his soul with good, who feels the utter failure of the endeavor upon which he has staked his all. But the test is a wrong one, however hard it may be to convince men that this is so. The questionIs life worth living? does not depend upon the questionDoes life yield a surplus of agreeable feeling? Life may be filled with delights, and the lot of the prosperous may excite envy. Yet it may be nothing but vanity, and a striving after wind. On the other hand, a man may be doomed to adversity; poverty and neglect and contempt may be his portion; whilst he may fulfill the purpose of his beingmay form a character and may live a life which shall be acceptable and approved above.T.

Est 6:7-9

Satisfaction better than desire.

It has sometimes been represented that the quest of good is better than its attainment. The truth and justice of this representation lies in the unquestionable fact that it would not be for our good to possess without effort, without perseverance, without self-denial. Yet the end is superior to the means, however excellently adapted those means may be to the discipline of the character, to the calling out of the best moral qualities.

I. MAN‘S NATURE IS CHARACTERIZED BY STRIVING, DESIRE, APPETITE, ASPIRATION. Man’s is a yearning, impulsive, acquisitive constitution. His natural instincts urge him to courses of action which secure the continuance of his own being and of that of the race. His restless, eager desires account for the activity and energy which distinguish his movements. His intellectual impulses urge him to the pursuit of knowledge, to scientific and literary achievement. His moral aspirations are the explanation of heroism in the individual, and of true progress in social life.

II. OF HUMAN DESIRES, NONE CAN EVER BE FULLY SATISFIED, MANY CANNOT BE SATISFIED AT ALL. The testimony of these who have gone before us is uniform upon this point.

“We look before and after,

We pine for what is not;

Our sincerest laughter

With some pain is fraught:

Our sweetest songs are those that tell of saddest thought.”

Thus it becomes proverbial that man is made to desire rather than to enjoy. Of our aspirations some can never be gratified on earth. The lower animals have desires for which satisfaction is provided; but whilst their life is thus thoroughly adapted to their constitution, this cannot be said of man, who has capacities which cannot be filled, aspirations which cannot be satisfied, faculties for which no sufficient scope is attainable here on earth. His, as the poet tells us, is

“The desire of the moth for the star,

Of the night for the morrow;

The longing for something afar

From the sphere of our sorrow.”

III. EVEN WISDOM DOES BUT ENLARGE THE RANGE OF MAN‘S INSATIABLE DESIRES. It is not only upon the lower grade of life that we observe a discordance between what is sought and what is attained. For the philosopher, as for the uncultured child of nature, there is an ideal as well as an actual. Prudence may enjoin the limitation and repression of our requirements. But thought ever looks out from the windows of the high towers, and gazes upon the distant stars.

“Who that has gazed upon them shining
Can turn to earth without repining,
Nor wish for wings to flee away,
And mix with their eternal day?”

IV. THESE CONSIDERATIONS TEND TO INCREASE THE UNHAPPINESS OF THE WORLDLY, WHILST THEY OPEN UP TO THE SPIRITUAL AND PIOUS MIND A GLORIOUS AND IMMORTAL PROSPECT. They to whom the bodily life and the material universe are everything, or even anything regarded by themselves, may well give way to dissatisfaction and despondency when they learn by experience “the vanity of human wishes.” On the other hand, such reflections may well prompt the spiritual to gratitude, for they cannot believe the universe to have been fashioned in vain; they cannot but see in the illusions of earth suggestions of the heavenly realities. The storms of life are not to be hated if they toss the navigator of earth’s sea into the haven of God’s breast. The wandering of the desire may end in the sight of the eyes, when the pure in heart shall see God. “In his presence is fullness of joy, and at his right hand am pleasure forevermore.”T.

Est 6:10

Contending against power.

The limitation which is characteristic of the human life and lot is observable, not only in man’s inability to attain the happiness he conceives and desires, but also in his inability to execute the purposes he forms. Conscious of powers which are yet undeveloped, inspired by an ambition that knows so bounds, he puts forth effort in many directions, at first with strong confidence and high hope. Experience alone convinces him of the truth expressed by the wise man in the assertion, “Neither can he contend with him that is mightier than he.”

I. THE WAY OF RESISTANCE. The will may be strong, and naturally prone to self-assertion, to energetic volition, and to contention with any resisting force.

1. God is, as the providential Ruler of the world, the Lord and Controller of all circumstances, mightier than man. Men fret against the conditions and limitations of their lot; they would fain possess greater strength and health, a longer life, enjoyments more varied and unmixed, etc. They resent the imposition of laws in the determination of which they had no voice. They are even disposed to believe that the world has been ordered, not by a benevolent Intelligence, but by a hard and cruel fate.

2. God is, as the moral Administrator and Judge, mightier than man. In their selfishness and prejudice, men may and do question the sway of reason in the universe; they assign all things to chance; they deny any laws superior to such as are physical and political; they deem man the measure of all things; they ridicule responsibility. All this they may do; but it is of no avail. God is mightier than they. They may violate his laws, but they cannot escape from their action; they may spurn his authority, but that authority is all the same maintained and exercised. The time comes when the insurgent and the rebel are constrained to admit that they are powerless, and that the Almighty is, and that he works and rules, and effects his righteous purposes.

II. THE WAY OF SUBMISSION. It is the province of religion to point out to men that there is a Power in the universe which is above all, and to summon men to yield to this Power a cheerful subjection.

1. Submission is a just requirement on the part of God, and an honorable attitude on the part of man. He is no tyrant, capricious and unjust, who claims our loyalty and service; but the Being who is himself infinitely righteous. To do him homage is to bow, not before irresistible power merely, but before moral perfection. Resistance here is slavery; subjection is freedom.

2. Submission is the one only condition of efficient work and solid happiness. Whilst we resist God, we can do nothing satisfactory and good; when we accept his will and receive our commands from him, we become fellow-workers with God. Just as the secret of the mechanician’s success is in obeying the laws of nature, i.e. the laws of God in the physical realm, so the secret of the success of the thinker and the philanthropist lies in the apprehension and acknowledgment of Divine law in the intellectual and moral kingdoms. Man may do great things when he labors under God and with God. And in such a course of life there is true peace as well as true success. “If God be for us, who can be against us?”T.

Est 6:11, Est 6:12

What is man’s good?

The author of this book constantly reverts to this inquiry, from which tendency we cannot fail to see how deep an impression the inquiry made upon his mind. In this he is not peculiar; the theme is one that grows not old with the lapse of centuries.

I. A NATURAL QUESTION, AND ONE BOTH LEGITIMATE AND NECESSARY. “There be many that say, Who will show us any good?” Sometimes the inquiry arises upon the suggestion of daily occupation; sometimes as the result of prolonged philosophical reflection. The good of man is certainly not obvious, or there would not be so many and varying replies to the question presented. A lower nature, not being self-conscious, could not consider such a question as the surnmum bonum; being what he is, a rational and moral creation, man cannot avoid it.

II. A QUESTION TO WHICH SO SATISFACTORY REPLY CAN BE GIVEN UPON THE BASIS OF EXPERIENCE.

1. The occupations and enjoyments of the present are proved to be productive of vanity. “Many things increase vanity.” Man “spendeth his vain life as a shadow.” The several objects of human pursuit agree only in their failure to afford the satisfaction that is desired and sought. Yet the path which one has abandoned another follows, only to be misled like those who have gone before, only to be put further than ever from the destination desired. The objects which excite human ambition or cupidity remain the same from age to age; and they have no more power to give satisfaction than in former periods of human history.

2. The future is felt to be clouded by uncertainty. “Who can tell a man what shall be after him under the sun?” This element of uncertainty occasioned perplexity and distress in former times, as now. What shall be a man’s reputation after his decease? Who shall inherit his estates? and what use shall be made of possessions accumulated with toil and difficulty? These and similar inquiries, made but not satisfactorily answered, disheartened even the energetic and the prosperous, and took the interest and joy out of their daily life. The present is unsatisfactory, and the future uncertain; where, then, shall we look for the true, the real good?

III. A QUESTION WHICH IS SOLVED ONLY BY FAITH. As long as we confine our attention to what can be apprehended by the senses, we cannot determine what is the real good in life. For that, in the case of rational and immortal natures, lies outside of the province in which supreme good must be sought. Good for man is not bodily or temporal good; it is something which appeals to his higher nature. The enjoyment of God’s favor and the fulfillment of God’s servicethis is the good of man. This renders men independent of the prosperity upon which multitudes set their hearts. “Lord, lift thou up the light of thy countenance upon us:” such is the desire and prayer of those who are emancipated from the bondage to time and sense, who see all things as in the light of Heaven, and whose thoughts and affections are not called away from the Giver of life and happiness by the gifts of his bounty, by the shadow of the substance that endures for ever. “Thy loving-kindness is better than life.”T.

HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON

Est 6:1-6

The insufficiency of circumstance.

The Preacher recurs to the same strain as that in which he spoke before (see Ecc 2:1-11). We have to face the same thoughts again.

I. AN IMAGINARY ENRICHMENT. Let a man have, by supposition:

1. All the money that he can spend.

2. All the honor that waits on wealth.

3. All the luxuries that wealth can buy of every kind, material and mental (Est 6:2).

4. Let him have an unusual measure of domestic enrichment and affection; let him be the recipient of all possible filial affection and obedience (Est 6:3).

5. Let his life be indefinitely prolonged (Est 6:6), so that it extends over many ordinary human lives. Give to a man not only what God does give to many, but give him that which, as things are, is not granted to the most favored of our race; and what then? What is

II. THE PROBABLE RESULT. It will very likely end in simple and utter dissatisfaction. “God giveth him not the power to eat thereof;” “His soul is not filled with good;” he gets so little enjoyment out of all that he has at command, that “an untimely birth is better than he;” he feels that it would have been positively better for him if he had never been born. Subtract the evil from the good in his life, and you have nothing left but “a negative quantity.” This is quite in accord with human experience. As much of profound discontent is found within the walls of the palace as under the cottage roof. The suicide is quite as likely to be found to be a “well-dressed man,” belonging to “good society,” as to be a man clad in rags and penniless.

III. ITS EXPLANATION. The explanation of it is found in the fact that God has made us for himself, that he has “set eternity in our hearts” (Ecc 3:11), and that we are not capable of being satisfied with the sensible and the transient. Only the love and service of God can fill the heart that is made for the eternal and the Divine (see homily on Ecc 1:7, Ecc 1:8).

IV. ITS CHRISTIAN CORRECTION. There need never live a man who has known Jesus Christ of whom so sad a statement as this has to be made. For a Christian life:

1. Even when spent in poverty and obscurity, is filled with a holy contentment; it includes high and sacred joys; it is relieved by very precious consolations.

2. Contains and transmits a valuable influence on others.

3. Constitutes an excellency which God approves, and the angels of God admire.

4. Moves on to a glorious future. It does not end in the grave.C.

Est 6:10

Heroism; infatuation; wisdom.

Translating the latter part of this passage thus, “And it is very certain that even the greatest is but man, and cannot contend with him who is mightier than he” (Cox), we have our attention directed to three things.

I. REAL HEROISM. This is found in opposing ourselves to the strong on behalf of the weak, even though the odds against us are very great, and apparently overwhelming. Wonderful triumphs have been achieved, even though the agents have “been but men,” when they have courageously and devoutly addressed themselves to the work before them. They have triumphed over

(1) powerful “interests;”

(2) imperious passions;

(3) deep-rooted prejudices;

(4) mighty numbers, in the cause of

(a) their country,

(b) truth,

(c) Jesus Christ.

II. PITIFUL INFATUATION. This is seen in those who are foolish enough to measure their poor strength (or their weakness) with the power of God, with “him who is mightier than they.” And this they do when they:

1. Act as if he did not regard them; when they say, “How doth God know? and is there knowledge in the Most High?” (Psa 73:11).

2. Imagine they can outwit him; when they think they will sin and be forgiven; will corrupt their lives and waste their powers, and yet find entrance at the last hour into his kingdom. But “God is not mocked; whatsoever a man sows, that does he reap.” Sin always carries its penalty at one time and in some form, if not in another.

3. Live in simple defiance of his rule; go on in conscious wrong-doing, in the vague and senseless hope that somehow they will “escape the judgment of God.”

III. TRUE WISDOM. This is realized in:

1. Submitting to his will; in acknowledging his supreme claims, as Father and Savior of our spirit, upon our worship and trust, our love, our service, and in yielding ourselves unreservedly to him.

2. Enlisting his Divine strength on our side. For if we are reconciled to him, and become his true and trusted children”his disciples indeed “then is God on our side; there is no need to speak of “contending” with him that is mightier than we; there is no further contest or variance. Surely “God is with us,” bestowing upon us his fatherly favor, admitting us to his intimate friendship, accepting us as his fellow-laborers (1Co 3:9), overruling all adverse (or apparently adverse) forces and making them work our true and lasting good (Rom 8:28), guarding us from every evil thing, leading us on to a peaceful end and out to a glorious future.C.

HOMILIES BY J. WILLCOCK

Est 6:1-6

Life without enjoyment valueless.

The problem which occupies the Preacher (Est 6:1, Est 6:2) is virtually the same as that in Ecc 4:7, Ecc 4:8. It is not that which is discussed in the Book of Job, and the thirty-seventh and seventy-third psalms, viz. why the wicked often prosper, and the righteous often suffer adversity. It is that of men blessed with riches, with children, and with long life, and debarred all enjoyment of these blessings. In the Law of Moses these had been the rewards promised for obedience to God (Deu 28:1-14), but the Preacher sees that something more is needed for happiness than the mere possession of them. There is another “gift of God” needed in order that one may enjoy the good of any one of them.

I. The first picture (verses 1, 2) is that of A RICH MAN, able to gratify every desire, but incapable of making his wealth yield him any pleasure or satisfaction. He may be a miser, afraid to make use of his riches; he may be in ill health, and find that his wealth cannot procure for him any alleviation of his pains; his domestic circumstances may be so unhappy as to cast a cloud over his prosperity. From various causes, such as these, the evil upon which our author remarks is common enough in human societygreat wealth failing to procure for its possessor any enjoyment he can relish, and perhaps passing at last, on his death, into the hands of a stranger, for want of an heir to whom he might have had some satisfaction in leaving it.

II. A second case of a different kind is suggested in verses 3-6. The rich man is NOT CHILDLESS, but has a numerous family, and lives out all his days; but he, too, often has no happiness in his life, and perhaps even fails to find honorable burial when he dies. His fate is worse than that of the stillborn child that has never tasted of life. “The abortion has the advantage in not having known anything; for it is better to know nothing at all than to know nothing but trouble. It is laid in the grave without having tasted the miseries of human life; in the grave, where, amid the silence and solitude of death, the cares and disappointments, the disquietudes and mortifications and distresses of this world are neither felt nor dreamed of” (Wardlaw). However gloomy these reflections of our author’s may seem at first sight, when we examine them a little more closely we find that they are not so somber in their character as many of the utterances of pessimistic philosophy. He does not contrast being with not-being, and declare that the latter is preferable, but he declares a joyless life to be inferior to that which has been “cut off from the womb.” His teaching that the value of existence is to be measured by the amount of good that has been enjoyed in it, is so far from being the utterance of a despairing pessimism that most sober-minded persons would accept it as reasonable and true. Specimens of utterances which, to a superficial reader, might appear to be closely akin to his, but which really are the expression of a very much darker mood than his, might easily be given. Thus we have in Theognis (425-428)

“Best lot for man is never to be born,
Nor ever see the bright rays of the morn:
Next best, when born, to haste with quickest tread
Where Hades’ gates are open for the dead,
And rest with much earth gathered for our bed?

And in Sophocles

“Never to be at all

Excels all fame;

Quickly, next best, to pass

From whence we came.”

And according to the teaching of Schopenhauer, the non-existence of the world is to be preferred to its existence. The world is cursed with four great evilsbirth, disease, old age, and death. “Existence is only a punishment,” and the feeling of misery which often accompanies it is “repentance” for the great crime of having come into the world by yielding to the “will to live”. Such despairing utterances, when found in the writings of those who have not known God, move us to compassion, but we can scarcely avoid the feeling of indignation when we find them on the lips of those who have known God, but have not “retained him in their knowledge.” And we must beware of concluding, after a hasty and superficial reading of the Book of Ecclesiastes, that its author, even in his darkest mood, sank to the depth of atheism and despair which they reveal.J.W.

Est 6:7-9

The insatiability of desire.

In these words the Preacher lays stress upon the little advantage which one man has over another in regard to the attainment of happiness and satisfaction in life. All are tormented by desires and longings which can never be adequately satisfied. His reference is principally, if not entirely, to the cravings of natural appetites to which all are subject, and which cannot by any gratification or exercise of will be wholly silenced. The instinct of self-preservation, the necessity of sustaining the body with food, inspire labor, and yet no amount of labor is sufficient to put an end, once and for all, to the gnawings of desire. The sensuous element in man’s nature is insatiable, and the appetites of which it consists grow in strength as they are indulged. Though the pressure of appetite differs in different cases, none are free from it. The wise as well as the foolish, the man of simple tastes and chastened temper, as well as he who gives free rein to all his impulses, feel it. Gifts of intellect, acquirements in culture, make no difference in this matter. Some little obscurity seems at first to hang over Est 6:8, but a little examination of the words disperses it. The whole verse runs (Revised Version), “For what advantage hath the wise man more than the fool? or what [advantage] hath the poor man [more than the fool], that knoweth to walk before the living?’ “To know to walk before the living is, as is haw generally acknowledged, to understand the right rule of life, to possess the savoir vivre, to be experienced in the right art of living, (Delitzsch). The question accordingly isWhat advantage has the wise over the fool? and what the poor, who, although poor, knows how to maintain his social position? The matter treated of is the insatiable nature of sensual desire. The wise seeks to control his desire; he who is spoken of as poor knows how to conceal it, for he lays restraints upon himself, that he may make a good appearance and maintain his reputation. But desire is present in both, and they have in this nothing above the fool, who follows the bent of his desire, and lives for the passing hour. In other words, “The idea of the passage seems to be, the desire of man is insatiable, he is never really satisfied; the wise man, however, seeks to keep his desires within bounds, and to keep them to himself, but the fool utters all his mind (Pro 29:11). Even the poor man, who knows how to conduct himself in life, and understands the right art of living, though he keeps his secret to himself, feels within himself the stirrings of that longing which is destined never to be satisfied on earth” (Wright). The reference here to the poor man may possibly be made because the Preacher has already praised the lot of the laboring man (Ecc 5:12) in comparison with that of the rich, whose abundance will not suffer him to sleep. If so, he virtually says here, half-humorously, “Don’t imagine that poverty is the secret of contentment and happiness. Poverty covers cares and anxieties as well as riches. Both rich and poor are pretty much on the same level.” A very simple and practical conclusion is drawn from the fact of the insatiability of desire, and that is the advisability of enjoying the present good that is within our reach (Est 6:9). That which the eyes see and recognize as good and beautiful should not be forfeited because the thoughts are wandering after something which may be forever unattainable by us. So far the teaching is not above that of the fable of the dog who lost the piece of flesh he had in his mouth, because he snapped at the reflection of it he saw on the surface of the water. And if this be thought but a poor, cold scrap of morality to offer to men for their guidance in life, the answer may be given that multitudes spend their life in fruitless endeavors after what is far above their reach, and bereave their souls of present good, from an insatiable greed which this fable rebukes. Constituted as we are, placed as we are amid many temptations, we need not despise any small scraps of moral teaching which may be even in threadbare fables, and homely, familiar proverbs. To say that the words, “Better is the sight of the eyes than the wandering of the desire,” is about equivalent to the proverb, “A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush,” may seem irreverent to some, who would fain read into the text more than it contains. But instead of imagining that the Word of God is degraded by the comparison, let them recognize the good sense and prudent advice which lie in the proverb which corresponds so closely to the sense of the Preacher’s words.J.W.

Est 6:10-12

Inexorable destiny.

Before considering these words of the Preacher, we need to obtain a clear and precise idea of the statements he makes. A considerable measure of obscurity hangs over the passage, and renders it all the more difficult to catch the writer’s meaning. This is apparent from the alternative renderings of several clauses in it which we have in the margin of the Revised Version. The general idea of the passage seems to beMan‘s powerlessness and short-sightedness with respect to destiny. “Whatsoever hath been, the name thereof was given long ago, and it is known that it is man: neither can he contend with him that is mightier than he” (Est 6:10). The difficult phrase is that thus translated”it is known that it is man,” But if we take the Hebrew phrase, as several eminent critics (Delitzsch, Wright) do, to be equal to scitur id quod homo sit“it is known that which a man is”an intelligible and appropriate meaning of the passage is obtained. It seems to point to the fact that man has been placed in certain unalterable conditions by the will of God, and to urge the advisability of submitting to the inevitable. Both as to time and place, the conditions have been fixed from of old, and no human effort can change them. The same thought occurs in St. Paul’s address to the Athenians: “He made of one every nation of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation” (Act 17:26, Revised Version). It is to be found also in Isaiah’s saying, “Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! a potsherd among the potsherds of the earth! Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?” And this passage in Ecclcsiastes seems to have been in the mind of the Apostle Paul quite as certainly as that just quoted from Isaiah, when he wrote the famous paragraph in the Epistle to the Romans on the potter and the clay (Rom 9:20, et seq.). That God has predetermined the conditions of our lives, and that it is useless to strive against his power, seems, therefore, the teaching of verse 10. The obscurity in verse 11 is caused by the translation, both in our Authorized Version and Revised Version, of the Hebrew as “things” instead of “words.” In the Revised Version “words” is given in the margin, but assuredly should be in the text, as in the ancient versions (LXX; Vulgate, Syriac): “Seeing there be many words that increase vanity, what is man the better?” (verse 11). Most probably the reference is to discussions concerning man’s freedom and God’s decrees, that were coming into rogue among the Jews. The nascent school of the Pharisees maintained fatalistic views concerning human conduct, that of the Sadducees denied the existence of fate (Josephus, ‘Ant.,’ 13.5. 9; 18.1.3, 4; ‘Bell. Jud.,’ 2.8. 14). The uselessness of all such discussions is also asserted later in Ecc 12:12, and is pathetically reiterated in the famous passage of Milton’s ‘Paradise Lost,’ in which some of the fallen angels are described as discussing

“Fixed fate, free-will, foreknowledge absolute;
Vain wisdom all, and false philosophy.”

The twelfth verse is clear enough. After all discussion as to the true course of life, who can give a decided answer? Life is a shadow; the future is unknown to us. “For who knoweth what is good for man in this life, all the days of his vain life, which he spendeth as a shadow? for who can tell a man what shall be after him under the sun?” No one can read the words without being struck with the dark, despairing Pyrrhonism of their tone. “A cloud of irrepressible, inexpressible melancholy hangs around the writer, a leaden weight is on the spring of his spirit.” And it is only when we consider that the spiritual education of the world by God has been gradual, that we can tolerate the words as expressing the thoughts of a mind not yet privileged to see truth in its fullness. If we believe that the light of truth is, like the light of the sun, increasing from the first faint rays that begin to dispel the darkness of midnight to the splendor of noonday, we shall not be surprised at the words of the Preacher. They would be highly inappropriate in one to whom the revelation of God in Christ had been given; as used by him, they would necessarily imply a gross unbelief, which would excite our indignation rather than our sympathy. Christianity puts the facts which the Preacher regarded as so somber in a fresh light, and strips them of all their terror. Let us take them in order.

I. THAT WHICH HE CALLED FATE WE CALL PROVIDENCE. “Since fate bears sway, and everything must be as it is, why dost thou strive against it?” said the Stoic, Marcus Aurelius (Ecc 12:13), and his words seem exactly similar to those before us. The idea of a fixed order in human life, a Divine will governing all things, does not necessarily fill us with the same gloomy thoughts, or summon us to a proud and scornful resignation to that which we cannot change or modify. In the teaching of Christ we have the fact of a preordination of things by God frequently alluded to, in such sentences as “Mine hour is not yet come;” “The hairs of your head are all numbered;” “Many be called, but few chosen;” “No man can come to me except the Father draw him;” “For the elect’s sake whom he hath chosen God hath shortened the days.” This is not a dark, inexorable fate governing all things, but the wise and gracious will of a Father, in which his children may trust with confidence and joy. The thought, I say, of all things being predetermined by the Divine will is prominent in the teaching of Christ, but it is set in such a light as to be a source of inspiration and strength. It prompts such comfortable assurances as, “Fear not, little flock; it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.”

II. THE PREACHER WAS HUMILIATED AT THE THOUGHT OF HUMAN‘ WEAKNESS. “Neither may he contend with one that is mightier than he.” But we know more clearly than he did of the Divine compassion for the poor and feeble and helplessa compassion that prompted God to send forth his Son for our redemption. We know that the Son of God took on him our nature, submitted to the toils, trials, privations, and temptations of a mortal lot, and overcame the worst foes by whom we are assailedsin and death. If, as some think, “the mightier” one here referred to is death, we believe that Christ took away his power, and that in his triumphant resurrection we have the pledge of everlasting life. And the one great lesson taught by the Church’s history is that God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the strong.

III. ANOTHER CAUSE OF GRIEF WAS THE FLEETING CHARACTER OF LIFE. Vain life which man spendeth as a shadow.” But this does not afflict us, who know that the grave is not the end of all things, but the door of a better life. The present existence acquires new value and solemnity when we consider it as the prelude to eternity, the time and place given us in which to prepare ourselves for the world to come. We have his words, “I am the Resurrection and the Life: whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die.” The sorrows and trials of the present dwindle into insignificance as compared with the reward we anticipate as in store for us if we are faithful to God. “Our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal” (2Co 4:17, 2Co 4:18).

IV. A FINAL CAUSE OF GRIEF WAS THAT THE FUTURE WAS DARK AND UNKNOWN. “Who can tell a man what shall be after him under the sun?” This is still true in many departments of life. The mightiest potentate cannot tell how long the dynasty he has founded, or of which he may be the brightest ornament, will last. The conqueror may be distressed by the thought that the power, to obtain which he has squandered myriads of lives and countless treasures, may soon fade away, and in a short time after his death vanish “like the baseless fabric of a vision.” The poet does not know that even the most brilliant of his works will be kept alive in the memories of men, and treasured among the things they will not willingly let die, within a generation or two after he has passed away. The successful merchant, who has built up a colossal fortune by the labors of a lifetime, cannot guard against its being dissipated in a very short time by those to whom he leaves it. But the Christian is in no such uncertainty. The cause of his Master he knows will prosper and grow to far vaster proportions in the time to come. The good work he has done will aid in the advancement of the kingdom of God, and no blight of failure will fall upon his efforts; the plans of God in which during his earthly life he co-operated will not be frustrated, and his own personal happiness is for ever secured. All the various causes of despondency by which the Preacher’s mind was harassed and perplexed vanish before the brighter revelation of God’s will given us in the mission and work of Christ. And it is only because we keep in mind that the truth vouchsafed to us was withheld from him, that we can read his words without being depressed by the burden by which his spirit was borne down and saddened. It would only be by our deliberately sinning against the light we enjoy that we could ever adopt his words as expressing our views of life.J.W.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

THIRD DISCOURSE

of true practical Wisdom.

Ecc 6:1 to Ecc 8:15.

A. It cannot consist in striving after earthly sources of happiness

Ecc 6:1-12.

1. Even those most richly blessed with earthly possessions do not attain to a true and lasting enjoyment of them

(Ecc 6:1-6.)

1There is an evil which I have seen under the sun, and it is common among men: 2A man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honor, so that he wanteth nothing for his soul of all that he desireth, yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof, but a stranger eateth it: this is vanity, and it is an evil disease. 3If a man beget an hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years be many, and his soul be not filled with good, and also that he have no burial;. I say, that an untimely birth is better than he. 4For he cometh in with vanity, and departeth in darkness, and his name shall be covered with darkness. 5Moreover he hath not seen the sun, nor known any thing: this hath more rest than the other. 6Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good:, do not., all go to one place?

2. He who strives most zealously after earthly happiness, never gets beyond the feeling of the vanity of all earthly things, and the hope of a totally obscure future

(Ecc 6:7-12.)

7All the labour of man is for his mouth, and yet the appetite is not filled. 8For what hath the wise more than the fool? what hath the poor, that knoweth to walk before-the living? 9Better is the sight of the eyes than the wandering of the desire: this is also vanity and vexation of spirit. 10That which hath been is named already, and it is known that it is man: neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he. 11Seeing there be many things that increase vanity, what is man the better? 12For who knoweth what is good for man in this life, all the days of his vain life which he spendeth as a shadow? for who can tell a man what shall be after him under the sun?

[Ecc 6:3. () this peculiar word occurs Job 3:16, Psa 58:9, as well as here; in all which places it has the same meaning of premature birth, or abortion. It comes from the Hiphil sense of the verb as used in such places as Isaiah 26:29, where it is applied to the earth as giving birth. For a similar use of the Greek , compare Homer, Iliad, xix. 110.T.L.]

[Ecc 6:4. ; See Remarks in Introduction to Metrical Version, p. 177.T.L.]

[Ecc 6:6. said to be a particle Sequioris Hebraismi (See Gesenius) but it is only a matter of pronunciation. It is only what would be in sound if written in fullthe in such cases, where the words are pronounced rapidly together, being elided in sound. This belongs to the Hebrew, as well as the Syriac and Arabic, and its appearance or non-appearance in writing is only a peculiarity of orthography which is not determinative of date, any more than the abbreviations of which are found in the ancient as well as in the later Hebrew writings. It would easily come from a copyist following the sound.T.L.]

[Ecc 6:10. , the point intended here requires that this should be rendered as the proper name. The reference is to the naming, Gen 2:7.T.L.]

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

This section contains firstly the negative of the illustration relative to the nature of true wisdom, which forms the contents of the third discourse, or a censure of the vain and perverse efforts of those who seek that wisdom in the way of external and earthly happiness. In two clearly marked sections or strophes of equal length, the author first shows that all worldly blessings are of no avail to him who is not able to enjoy them (Ecc 6:1-6) and then that this very incapability of enjoyment depends partly on the perception of the vanity of earthly things, and partly on the necessity, affecting all men, of depending on a totally dark and uncertain future, while dissatisfied with the present (Ecc 6:7-12). The latter of these two sections (especially in its second half, Ecc 6:10-12) reminds us of previous reflections, as Ecc 1:2-11; Ecc 3:1-9; and partially also of Ecc 5:12-16. But that the last named passage reappears in its principal thoughts in the present place, is an unjustified assertion of some commentators (also of Vaihinger, p. 34). For, as Hitzig properly observes, there the rich man loses his blessings without having enjoyed them; here, on the contrary, he retains them. Ewald, Elster, Hahn, and some others, begin a new leading section with Ecc 6:10 of this chapter (Ewald, indeed, a new discourse, which he extends from Ecc 6:10; Ecc 8:16). But since Ecc 6:10-12 clearly belong to the description of the vanity of earthly happiness commenced in Ecc 6:1, whilst the admonition to walk in. the ways of true wisdom does not commence until Ecc 7:1, etc., our division, which corresponds with the division of the chapters, is to be preferred.

2. First strophe. Ecc 6:1-6. The unhappiness of not being able to enjoy present earthly blessings. There is an evil which I have seen under the sun. In words similar to Ecc 10:5; and in like manner to chap. 5. 13.And is common among men. (Zcklers translation, and it bears heavily on man). Literally: And is a great thing on man. cannot here have been intended to show the frequency of the evil (Luther, and is common among men; Vulg. malum frequens), but only its extent and weight, as is shown by the expression in the parallel passages Ecc 2:21; and

Ecc 8:6

Ecc 6:2. A man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honor. The same tuiad of sensual goods: 2Ch 1:11; comp. similar combinations in Pro 3:16; Pro 8:18; Pro 22:4. Hengstenberg is arbitrary in (he assertion, that by the rich man is meant the Persian, and by the stranger, named immediately afterwards, the successor of the Persian in the dominion of the world. This discourse is much too general in its character to permit us to seek in it such special historical and political allusions. For the doubtful propriety of affirming such political allusions in this book, see Introduction, 4, Obs. 3.So that he wanteth nothing for his soul of all that hedesireth. (Zckler, of any thing). This is clearly the meaning of as is shown partly by the suffix in , and partly also by the construction of with occurring in Ecc 4:8. Therefore not: he wanteth for his soul nothing of all ( Vulg., Drusius, Bauer, etc.), but of any thing. The Septuagint is more correct, , also Luther and nearly all the modern commentators.Yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof. This incapacity of enjoyment can proceed from the sickness of the wealthy possessor, or from the burden of heavy cares which rob him of his sleep (comp. Ecc 5:12), or from a soul made gloomy by melancholy or dejection (comp. Ecc 5:17). The author can only mean such an inability to enjoy blessings as is connected with a steady continuance of their possession, as more clearly appears in Ecc 6:3; Ecc 6:6; consequently not an inability caused by the deprivation of them, by some other misfortune, or by early death, as Ewald and Vaihinger suppose. For , to empower, to enable, i.e., to allow or grant, comp. Ecc 5:19. God must grant us the possession of goods, and also the power to enjoy themthe same God who in an ethical sphere provides all in all, the Posse, the Velle, and the Perficere.But a stranger eateth iti.e., not some robber of his goods, (Ewald, Vaihinger) or the successor of the Persian in the rule of the world (Hengstenberg), but the reckless heir1 of the rich man, who, during the lifetime of the latter, and when he is tortured by disease, sorrow, or foolish avarice, already begins to riot and revel with his goods, and after his death will exhaust them in feasting and merry-making. (Comp. Ecc 2:18).This is vanity, and it is an evil disease. Evil disease is an expression originating perhaps in Deu 28:59, which here signifies an evil resembling a very malignant disease. The word however, has no sort of etymological connection with cholera ( from , gall). Ecc 6:3. If a man beget a hundred children. For the high appreciation, in the old covenant, of the blessing of many children, comp. Gen 24:60; Psa 127:3-5; Job 27:14; and for the value attached to long life, Exo 10:12; Deu 11:9; Deu 11:21; Psa 49:9.And live many years, so that the days of his years be many. Herein is meant the sum of all the days of which all his years consist (Psa 90:10.) To the first clause, and live many years, is added the latter equivalent one, as explanatory and emphatic, without producing an absolute tautology.And also that he have no burial, that is, an honorable burial, that testifies of the real love of his posterity, and therefore truly deserves the name of burial. The opposite of such an honorable burial is that found in Isa 53:9.He made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; or in Jer 22:19.He shall be buried with the burial of an ass; or in the neglect of burial and the lying on the face of the earth like dung (Jer 8:2; Jer 9:21; Jer 25:33; Isa 14:19-20; Psa 79:3). The cause of such dishonorable , which is not truly we are clearly to find in the absence of filial piety and esteem on the part of the posterity of the avaricious rich man, and not in the sordid meanness of the latter himself, who ex turpi tenacitate non audeat aliquid honestie sepullurse destinare (Schmidt, Ramb., and Vaihinger). Hengstenberg unnecessarily assumes for the signification of grave, tomb, a meaning elsewhere quite common. As in this passage, so also does the context in Jer 22:19 rather demand the sense of exeqise, funus. Hitzigs position that the words: and also that he have no burial is simply a note originally written on the margin of verse 5, is pure caprice.I say that an untimely birth is better than he;because such a birth has enjoyed no pleasure in this life, but has also experienced no suffering; comp. Ecc 4:2 f., and especially Job 3:16. Verses 4 and 5 continue the comparison of the untimely birth.For2 he cometh in with vanity, i.e., falls into nothingness from his mothers womb. And his name shall be covered with darkness, i.e., he receives no name, but is given over to absolute oblivion. (Elster). Moreover he hath not seen the sun;this sun which shines brightly and lovingly, but also shines on a great deal of vanity and vexation, of woe and misery; wherefore it may be considered a good fortune not to have seen it. This hath more rest than the other. Rest, i.e., freedom from the annoyances, toils, and troubles of this life. We are certainly not to think with Hitzig of that passive, dreamy rest so desired by the Orientals.3 For the use of the comparative here, comp. Psa 52:3; Hab 2:16. Ecc 6:6. Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told; therefore twice as long as the life of the oldest patriarchs from Adam to Noah. Hieronymus is correct in saying: et non tit Adam prope mille, sed duobus millibus vixerit annis, Not lived, as Adam, near a thousand, but two thousand years,Yet hath he seen no good. Comp. Ecc 2:24; Ecc 3:12, etc. Do not all go to one place? namely, to Scheol, in which all arrive equally poor, and where we cannot regain what we have failed to enjoy on earth; comp. Ecc 9:10; Ecc 11:8. As an extension to the principal clause, this question might be introduced with the expression: I ask then.

3. Second strophe. Ecc 6:712. The cause of this inability to enjoy earthly blessings, consists in the vanity of the present and the uncertainty of the future conditions of the happiness of men. All the labor of man is for his mouth, and yet the appetite is not filled.(Zckler, the soul.) That is, all human life is a grasping after enjoyment, but after an enjoyment vain in itself, and affording no true satisfaction. Mouth and soul stand in contrast to each other as representatives of the purely sensual and therefore transitory enjoyment (comp. Job 12:1; Pro 16:26) as compared with the deeper, more spiritual, and, therefore, more lasting kind of joy. The clear sense of this verse, in essential harmony with Ecc 1:8, is, that the necessity of the inner man for a more substantial and lasting enjoyment is not satisfied by pleasures of that kind, namely, by eating and drinking (Ecc 2:21; Ecc 3:13; Ecc 5:18; Ecc 8:15); and therefore here cannot be translated by desire, sensual desire; and this same remark applies to Ecc 6:2, or Ecc 6:9, notwithstanding the opposite view of Hitzig, Vaihinger, Elster, etc. Luthers translation is also unfitting; he gives heart, but his entire conception of the verse is grammatically inaccurate: Labor is appointed to every man according to his strength, but the heart cannot abide by it. Ecc 6:8. For what hath the wise more than the fool? That is, one may strive after the more earnest and real, instead of the mere sensual pleasure, and thus, by a desire for food for his soul, show himself a wise man in contrast with the fool who seeks only to satisfy his mouth: but the former has no real advantage over the latter, since neither attains to the desired satisfaction of the soul. This sentence clearly holds a confirming relation to the preceding, and not an opposing one, as Elster holds; he translates by nevertheless, as does Hitzig, who regards this verse as opposing the contents of the verse preceding. Hengstenberg affirms an extravagant comparison between the wise man and the fool, when he supposes that both are here equally accused of avarice. On the contrary, a distinction is here clearly drawn between the desire of the fool, aiming at possession and enjoyment, and the more thoughtful, more self possessed, more honorable and worthy conduct of the wise man.4 The latter is indicated in the second clause by the words: The poor that knoweth to walk before the living. Here the word poor ( humble) shows the moral condition and demeanor of the wise man, by virtue of which, with a more just conception of himself as an humble quiet one in the land, he leads a modest and retired life (comp. Psa 10:2; Psa 34:6; Psa 37:2; Zec 9:9, etc.); but knowing to walk before the living, is understanding the correct rule of life, and the true and godly intercourse with ones fellowmen, and is, therefore a circumlocution to express the idea of wise in the solemn Old Testament sense. Ewald, following the masoretic accentuation (which is here not authoritative), separates (knowing) from the following infinitive clause, and regards this as the subject: What profits it to the patient man, to the understanding man to walk before the living (i.e., to live)? But the adjective conception of knowing, intelligent, is neither sustained by Pro 27:27, nor Ecc 9:11, and the parallel passages Pro 4:13; Pro 4:17, and many others, support the direct connection with the following word The explanations of Luther are ungrammatical. Why does the poor man dare to be among the living? and the Vulg. Et quid pauper, nisi ut pergat iliac, ubi est vita? Ecc 6:9. Better is the sight of the eyes than the wandering of the desire, (Zckler, of the soul). That is, because the wise man with his strivings after higher aims, has nothing better than the pleasure-seeking fool, therefore a contented enjoyment of the present is the most desirable, more to be desired than a restless striving without satisfaction, or than the wearying ones self with manifold designs with no hope of their success. The sight of the eyes is here, as in Ecc 6:11; Ecc 6:7, the pleasant enjoyment of that which is before the eyes, or of the good and the beautiful which are present. (See Luther on this passage, in the Homiletical Hints). The wandering of the soul (not of the desire, see Ecc 6:7), is the uneasy scheming of the man dissatisfied with his modest lot, the passionate (Luk 12:29) or the (Rom 12:16), consequently the same as the expression: His soul shall not be filled in Ecc 6:3; Ecc 6:7, only marking more clearly than this the self-caused guilt of the want of spiritual contentment. This sentence has many parallels among the classic authors; e.g., Horace, 4 Ep. I. 18, 96 ss:

Inter cuncta leges, et percontabere doctos,

Qua ratione queas traducere leniter vum,

Ne te semper inops agitet vexetque cupido,

Ne pauor et rerum mediocriter ulilium spes.

Comp. Marcus Aurelius 3:16; 4:26; Juvenal, Sat. 14:178; Lucian, Necromant. I, 194 etc.This is also vanity and vexation o spirit; namely this maxim: Better is the sight of the eyes, etc., and a life and conduct in accordance with it. A partial reference of to the wandering of the soul (Luther and Hengstenberg) corresponds quite as little to the sense as the extension of the thought to everything from Ecc 6:7 onward [Vaihinger and Elster]. Comp. the case precisely similar t this in Ecc 2:26. Ecc 6:10. That which hath been is named already. This remark reminding us of Ecc 1:9 f., proves the authors way for the description of the total uncertainty and obscurity of the future of man, in so far a it points to his banishment, into the fixed circle of all creature life and action. That which hath been is named already, i.e., it has already been, in the past, something in its nature manifest and well-known. The exclusive reference of the clause to man, by means of which Gen 5:2; Psa 139:16, etc., would become parallels of this passage, is forbidden by the neuter . The discourse does not make special reference to man until we reach the following clause. And it is known that it is man, [Zckler, the man]. Here Ewald and Elster are correct; it is not that he is a man (Knobel, Vaihinger, Hengstenberg) or, what the man is (Rosenmueller), or, who the man is (Hahn), or finally, that if one is a man he cannot contend, etc., (Hitzig),these are all conceptions that militate against the connection, and do not correspond to the simple expression .[5] Neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he. That is with God, namely, with Him who is or [Job 5:17; Rth 1:20-21, etc.], who is superior to man just because He is mightier than man [ ] or because He has ordained the whole circle of human existence with absolute creative power, so that man may neither contend with Him nor break through the limit to which he is assigned. For the word , to contend with anyone, compare 2Sa 19:10, which there, as elsewhere, has this sense. For the sentence compare also the question (originating perhaps in this very passage): ? 1Co 10:22

Ecc 6:11. Seeing there be many things that increase vanity. That is, human life abounds in possessions, chances, vicissitudes of fortune, trials and dangers which strengthen in us the feeling of the vanity and weakness of this earthly existence, and show us that we are absolutely dependent on a higher power against which we cannot contend. The context decides against the ordinary rendering: for there are many words which, etc., [Sept., Vulg.,. and also Ewald, Hitzig, Elster and Hahn], for the reference to useless talk, etc., is foreign to it.[6]What is man the better? Namely, that he possesses, experiences, or enjoys these many things that simply increase vanity.

Ecc 6:12. For who knoweth what is good for man in this life?Namely, what of earthly things, whether happiness or unhappiness, wealth or poverty, the fulfilment of his desires or their disappointment. The concealed nature of mans own future is expressed by this question.All the days of his vain life. Literally: the number of the days, etc. (Com. Ecc 5:18) is the accusative of measure or duration.Which he spendeth as a shadow. Literal: and he passeth them, etc. Because (days of) is separated from by a compound genitive, the copula is placed before this clause which is to be considered as relative (Hitzig). With compare Act 15:33, dies facere, Cicero ad Attic. v. 20.For who can tell a man?, here, is not equivalent to so that, but is substantially synonymous with for, (comp. Deu 3:24; Dan 1:10), expressing an affirmative and intensified sense. Comp. Psa 10:6; Job 5:5; Job 9:15; Job 19:27. In the present clause the effort is certainly to intensify the truth that man is not permitted to look into the future of his earthly existence.What shall be after him under the sun. After him, i.e., after his present condition, not after his death; comp. Ecc 3:22; Ecc 8:14; and see the exegetical illustrations to the former passage.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

(With Homiletical Hints.)

The theme of this section is too narrowly drawn, if, with Starke, we find only therein depicted the extremely unhappy nature of the miser, or, with Hengstenberg, the vanity of wealth, [and indeed, as Hengstenberg supposes, illustrated by the example of the rich Persians[7] and the poor Israelites]. That which in the present chapter is discountenanced, and presented as incompatible with true wisdom, is not merely the striving after money and possessions, but also the desire for honor, long life, many children (Ecc 6:2-3; Ecc 6:6), and, in short, the struggle for earthly happiness in general. And firstly, in Ecc 6:1-6, wealth without a cheerful and contented feeling in the heart, then in Ecc 6:7-9 sensual enjoyment without satisfaction of soul, and finally in Ecc 6:10-12, a happy present with an obscure and uncertain future, are named as those things which must bring men to the consciousness of the vanity of all earthly goods and pleasures, and forbid them to strive after them. All the conditions and circumstances named, belong to those many things that increase vanity, as found in Ecc 6:11, and which, according to Ecc 6:3-6, permit the longest life, and the one most richly blessed with posterity, to seem scarcely any better than the lot of an untimely birth that has not even seen the light of this world. It is a bitter and cutting thought, which, like the similar one in Ecc 4:2, f., is only softened and, as it were, excused by the admonition to a contented, resigned and grateful enjoyment and use of life, which clearly forms its background [distinctly visible in Ecc 6:9], and again practically takes away the one-sided character of the apparent accusation of the Creator and Ruler of the world. Only the insatiable, ever-dissatisfied chasing after earthly means of happiness is thereby forbidden, as in opposition to the divinely-appointed task of human life. A temperate and modest striving after a cheerful and useful course of life, (which verse 8 expressly praises as the characteristic of the wise man) is emphatically recommended, not only in the preceding Ecc 5:18-20, but in those immediately following [especially in Ecc 7:11 ff.] It is the cheerful and noble form of , that cardinal virtue, not merely of the ancient classical but also of biblical ethics, which forms the framework of this mainly gloomy and admonishing picture, and presents a corrective to contents so apparently dubious, and easily misunderstood.

The principal thought of this chapter might be well represented by the following quotations: Set your affections on things above, not on things on the earth; or, Lay not up for yourselves treasures on earth, etc.; or, And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abidelh forever. (Col 3:2; Mat 6:19; 1Jn 2:17).

Homiletical hints on separate passages

Ecc 6:1-2. Brenz: The scheming and striving of our old Adam is of such a nature, that it measures the happiness of this life solely according to the abundance of treasures and riches. Let this old Adam go, for it is of no use! Dost thou think that nothing would be wanting to a happy life if thou only hadst an abundance of riches and honors ? The matter is very different, as daily experience teaches.Weimar Bible: The lamentations of the miser are not removed by excess of riches, by the number of children, or by long life; they are rather increased by these things (1Ti 6:10).Lange: The desire for temporal things clings to us all, and when we cease to watch and pray, we can soon be put to sleep, and charmed to our ruin, by such earthly love.

Ecc 6:3-6. Geier: A long life without rest and peace in God, is nothing but a long martyrdom.Starke: To have many children is a special blessing of God (Psa 127:3; Psa 128:3, f.); but apart from the enjoyment of divine favor, this also is vanity.Lange: What the untimely birth loses of natural life without any fault of its own, that the miser wantonly robs himself of in spiritual life. Because his soul has no firm foundation in communion with the good God, it goes to ruin, (Gal 6:8).

Ecc 6:7-8. Tubingen Bible: Above all things let us strive that our immortal spirit be filled with heavenly treasures, which alone can truly satisfy it.Lange: He who cares not to appease and satisfy his soul, finds his proper place among fools, Luk 12:19 f.Hengstenberg: That the soul of man is never satisfied, notwithstanding his narrow capacity for enjoyment, is very strange, and a mighty proof of the degree to which our race, since Gen 1:3, has yielded to sin and folly, producing many foolish and hurtful lusts, (1Ti 6:9).

Ecc 6:9. Luther: It is better that we use what is before our eyes, than that the soul should thus wander to and fro. Solomon means that we use the present and thank God for it, and not think of other things, like the dog in the fable that seizes the shadow and drops the meat. And he therefore says: what God has placed before thine eyes (the present) that use contentedly, and follow not thy soul which does not become filled.Therefore let every Christian and believer rest with what he has, and be satisfied with what God has given him in the present! But the ungodly are not thus; all that they see is a torture to them; for they use not the present, their soul is never filled, and it wanders hither and thither. He who has immense sums of money has not enough; he does not use it but desires more; if he has one wife he is not satisfied but wants another; if he has a whole realm, he is not contented; as Alexander the Great could not be satisfied with one world.Cramer: Be contented with what thou hast; this is better than in greed to be ever desiring other things.Berleb. Bible: This is the wandering of the soul, that rung about among creatures, and, like Esau, on the field of this world, chases after a palatable food, which wisdom finds only at home, and in the repose of contentment.Hengstenberg: is better to rejoice in that which is before our eyes, however humble it may be, since man really needs so little, than to yield to the caprices of ones lusts, and to torture ones self with plans and hopes that so easily deceive us, or, if they are fulfilled, afford so little happiness.

Ecc 6:10-11. Cramer: That man should leave a pleasant name and memory behind is not unchristian; but the highest good does not consist therein. For as time discovereth all things, so it covereth all things up. (Psa 31:13; Exo 1:8).Hansen: All human things are subjected to God. He often deposes the highest from the throne of their glory where they least expect it, Dan 4:27-30.Hengstenberg: If man is in a state of unconditional dependence on God, he should not permit to himself many vagaries, and should not torture himself with schemes and stratagems; because he cannot protect what he has acquired, and is not for a moment certain that he may not hear the cry: thou fool, this night thy soul will be demanded of thee; therefore it is foolish to envy the heathen because of their wealth, which can so soon wither away, like the flower of the field, Jam 1:10-11.The rich man has, in truth, no more than the poor one; what the former seems to have over the latter, proves, on closer inspection, to be but show and vanity. It disappears as soon as the judgments of God pass over the world.

Ecc 6:12. Luther: Mens hearts strive after all sorts of things: one seeks power, another wealth, and they know not that they will acquire them; thus they use not their present blessings, and their hearts ever aspire to that which they have not yet, and see not yet.Why do we thus annoy and torture ourselves with our thoughts, when future things are not for a moment in our power? Therefore we should be contented with the present that God gives us now, and should commit all to God, who alone knows and rules both the present and the future.Rambach: From all which it appears, that there is nothing better than to proscribe base avarice, be content with the present, and enjoy it with a pious cheerfulness.Zeyss: Although a Christian may not know how it may be with the things of this world after his death, yet he can be assured by faith that he, after death, will be with Christ in heaven.Hengstenberg: One would only be justified in esteeming wealth in case he knew the future, and had it in his power. The merest chance can suddenly rob one of all that has been gathered with pain and toil. A great catastrophe may come and sweep everything away as a flood. The practical result therefore is that one should strive after the true riches. As P. Gerard says; Earthly treasures dissolve and disappear, but the treasures of the soul never vanish.

Footnotes:

[1][The phrase , a stranger man, cannot possibly mean here an heir, or one of kin, either near or remote. Besides the context, and especially the mention of his having no funeral, shows an utter dispossession, in whatever way it may be supposed to have taken place. He, and his hundred sons, are all reduced to poverty, and there is none to do him the honor of such a funeral as his estate might have demanded. This is the soreness of it.T. L.]

[2][It should be rendered though it cometh in with vanity, etc. See the remarks on , as denoting a reason notwithstanding, as well as a reason for, Introd. to Metrical Version p. 177. The rendering for completely changes the sense, and makes the reader think of the rich man, until the context forces to the other conception. The same effect is produced in our E. V. by the rendering he instead of it, which is more properly applicable to the abortion, conceived of as impersonal. See Met. Ver.T. L.]

[3][The word does not primarily mean rest, repose, in either sense, but simply a lying down. It refers to the state or condition taken as a whole. So , from the same root, means a place of rest, rather than rest itself, as in Psa 23:2, means not the still waters, but the streams by which the sheep lie down to rest. It does not refer to the quality of rest, much less to its quantity as our E. V. would make it: More rest than the other; but is simply an affirming that the state or condition, on the whole, of the vainly born is better, more desirable, than that of the man who vainly lived. The one is better off than the other.T. L.]

[4][Stuarts view here is worthy of consideration. It is the apodictic, he says, i. e., such as is employed in sentences of this nature: Ifso and so; then () this or that consequence. He takes it as an objectors language, or the author personifying an objector, thus: The appetite is not satisfied;then (asks the inquirer) how do the wise have any advantage, etc.? Stuart says the question is not answered here; but it may be regarded as having a suggested, if not a direct response in the verse following: better the sight of the eyes, that is, the contented enjoyment of the wise, than the fools ever roving desire. This is the view adopted and (expressed in the Metrical Version.T. L.]

[5][Ecc 6:10. That which hath been is named already, and it is known that it is man. This rendering of our English Version seems to have little or no meaning, and points to no connection with the following verse. Stuarts is little better. Zckler sheds no light upon it. He has no right to regard so distinct and emphatic a phrase as , as meaning simply a known existence in the past. The other interpretations, of Ewald, Elster, Knobel, Vaihinger, Hengstenberg, Rsenmueller, Hahn, fail to satisfy. Their very discrepancies as to the rendering of so simple a phrase as , show that they have missed some fundamental idea which would at once take away from it all uncertainty. Hitzigs is the most unmeaning of them all. The older commentators, such as Munsterus, Mercerus, Tirinus, Pineda, Ar. Montanus, Geier, and even Grotius (see Poles Synopsis) saw in it an allusion to the narrative, Gen 2:19, of Adams giving names to things (nomen inditum conveniens rei cujusque natur) and to the name of Adam itself, as derived from Gen 2:7 and Ecc 6:2. They fail however to bring it clearly out. Among the moderns, Wordsworth distinctly favors this view. See also the remarks of the spiritually minded Matthew Henry. The key of the passage would seem to be given in the words (comp. Gen 2:19 ), its name was named of old. There is no need of departing here from the most close and literal rendering, or for seeking any foreign idea in the word naming, as though it were a mere expression for existence (Stuart and Zckler) or for being well-known. The reference is to the supposed fact, or idea, that names denote (as the best philology shows they were originally intended to denote) the nature of the thing named,an idea which certainly seems to be implied in the account Gen 2:19. Keeping this in view, we get a clear meaning from the most literal rendering: what a thing is ( here used indefinitely like the Greek , Latin quid, aliquid, see Job 13:13; Pro 9:13; 2Sa 18:27; Ecc 1:9; Ecc 3:15; Ecc 3:22; Ecc 7:24; Ecc 8:7; Ecc 10:14; or, with or , illud quod), what each thing is, or, each thing, what it is, its name was named of old,that is, it was named according to what it is (comp. Aristotles peculiar expression for the idea, or individuality, of a thing, its , its being what it is, or its being something). And then what follows is stated by way of example; the conjunction being used comparatively as it often is: , and so, known what he is ( ), is man, or rather Adam (keeping the proper name in translation as the only way of giving force to the play upon the name. Thus known for what he is (by his name), or thus made known (denoted what he is) is Adam (man from earth). Then there is seen immediately the connection with the next verse, expressing his weakness as well as earthliness. The whole, then, may be thus paraphrased: Names of old were given to things, to each thing, according to their nature; so man was denoted, made known, or simply, known, from what he is, his earthliness and frailty. The objection of Zckler in respect to the gender of has no weight. It is taken indefinitely, and so what (that which) was used instead of who. Compare Psa 8:5 , Psa 144:3 , what is man? The Metrical Version follows a close literality at the expense of smoothness,the words in brackets not at all adding to the sense, but necessary to give the English reader the play upon the name. It is as though there had been used the word mortal, which is taken in English for a name or epithet of man, or the Greek , which is so much used in Homer for the same purpose. There is probably some allusion to the peculiar language of this passage in the Midrash Rabba (on Numbers 19) where we have the following account: When the Holy One had created Adam, He brought before him the animals, and said of each, see this ( what is this), what is its name ( )? Adam said, this is , shor, (ox)this is , chamor, (ass)this is sus (horse), and so on. And thouwhat is thy name? He answered, I should be called , (Adam) because I was taken from adamah. And I,what is my name? Thou shouldst be called , Adonai, for Thou art Adon ( ), the Lord of all Thy creatures. There can be good reasons given for Koheleth’s philology here, but its correctness or incorrectness is of no account in reference to the allusion, or the idea of humanity which it conveys. See Genesis, p. 203, marginal note.T.L.]

[6][On the contrary the contrast seems clearly to point to the rendering words, although Zckler agrees here with our English Version, and with that of Luther. It is confirmed by What follows: who knowswho can tell. It indicates the disputations which had commenced in the speculative or philosophical world, and which Solomon had doubtless heard of, although perhaps not familiar with them. His intercourse with the Egyptians, Phnicians, Sabans, and Arabians (perhaps with some of the more eastern people to whom his ships had gone), was sufficient for this purpose. The speculative mind began very early to inquire concerning the design and end of human life, de finibus bonorum et malorum. Philosophy was then rising in Greece; though, at this early time, its schools bad not yet assumed shape. Many were saying ( , Psa 4:7) who will show us the good. We have seen how the Psalmist answers the questions there (Marg. note p. 95) by directing lo the real good, , the true , the favor of God, or blessedness in distinction from mere happiness,the light of thy countenance. Koheleth here regards as vanity all merely human disquisitions of this kind. They only increase vanity (see 1Co 7:1, . knowledge puffeth up, bloweth up), or as it may be read, taking adverbially, they multiply in vain What is man the better for all this talk? Who knows what is good for him? Who can tell him what shall be after him? By way of contrast compare Psa 119:129-130 : Thy testimonies are wonderful; the entrance of THY words giveth light; they give understanding to the simple.T. L.]

[7][A false historical hypothesis, especially if it be in the face of the claim made by the writing itself, produces great mischief in continually warping exegesis. Nothing shows this more than Hengstenbergs continually turning the most general remarks into something about the Persians and the Persian times.T. L ]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The Preacher openeth this Chapter with a strong proof of vanity in one man laying up for another; and the fruit of all his labours enjoyed by a stranger. He shows that the longest life spent in vanity, is spent but in vexation of spirit. And he arrives, at the close of the Chapter, to the same conclusion as before.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

There is an evil which I have seen under the sun, and it is common among men: (2) A man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honour, so that he wanteth nothing for his soul of all that he desireth, yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof, but a stranger eateth it: this is vanity, and it is an evil disease.

I beg the Reader to observe with me, that in the gifts here spoken of, no mention is made of grace. Riches, wealth, and honour; that is, the world’s honour, may be given to the most worthless of men; but these are left-hand gifts in the common providences of God. It is grace which is of the upper-spring blessings. Never would the Lord have marked the path of his children in the suffering way, if his glory, and their happiness, had not been highly interested thereby. Reader! I take this occasion to remark to you, what can never be too frequently, nor too strongly impressed upon the mind, that among the mistakes of the carnal, the misinterpreting God’s providences is a very principal one, to quiet and still their consciences. Thousands conclude, that if they prosper in their worldly concerns, this is a proof of divine love towards them; and that therefore they are high in his favour. May the Lord deliver the Reader from this delusion, if he should be at this time under it. And though the reverse of this is not always the case, for sometimes God’s dear children may be blessed in their honourable and honest callings, yet so much to the contrary is the case, that prosperity is always to be suspected. Who so poor, so wretched, so great a man of sorrows as Christ? What servant, what apostle of his, eminent for labours, but hath been eminent for suffering also? Let the serious Reader consult those two scriptures only upon the subject, without adding more, and I will then leave him to his own comment upon them: Job 21 and Psa 73 .

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Ecc 6:9

Perhaps the inherent force of a nature is shown even more in its passive and negative than in its active and positive self-expressions. In its power of voluntarily limiting its own horizon; of setting itself arbitrary boundaries; of saying ‘Thus far will I go, see, admit, and no further’. For it takes a lot of latent strength to sit, either mentally or physically, really still. Not to fidget. To ‘stay put,’ in short.

Lucas Malet’s Wages of Sin, book iv. v.

Not until a man has rid himself of all pretension, and taken refuge in mere unembellished existence, can he gain that peace of mind which is the foundation of human happiness.

Schopenhauer.

You may paddle all day long; but it is when you come back at nightfall and look in at the familiar room, that you find Love or Death awaiting you beside the stove; and the most beautiful adventures are not those we go to seek.

R. L. Stevenson.

References. VI. 12. Spurgeon, Sermons, vol. xlii. No. 2462. VII. 1 . Ibid. vol. xxvii. No. 1588.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

The Vanity of Riches

Ecc 6

We now come to some rough notes put down hurriedly in Coheleth’s memorandum-book. They might be heads of discourses, or words overheard in society, or points set down for discussion; at all events, there is no apparent connection between them, and no literary art in their distribution. We have to deal with separate thoughts rather than with a connected and cumulative argument, and as the expositor is bound by his author we have no option but to look at these rough notes in the order in which they are put down by a very baffled and bewildered man.

“There is an evil which I have seen under the sun, and it is common among men: a man to whom God hath given riches, wealth, and honour, so that he wanteth nothing for his soul of all that he desireth, yet God giveth him not power to eat thereof, but a stranger eateth it: this is vanity, and it is an evil disease” ( Ecc 6:1-2 ).

This is an English picture, appallingly vivid in colouring, to be seen before the Royal Academy opens and after the Royal Academy closes, and to be viewed without money and without price. It is the picture of a man with plenty to eat but with no appetite! with innumerable horses but without any wish to go out! with golden goblets on which Gout is written in letters fiery in their redness! It is the picture of a man who has got all he wants but cannot use it. Riches are not uncompounded joys, nor is greatness, nor is fame; the sting, the thorn, the poison-drop are everywhere. What is it that accompanies the most sumptuous chariot on the brightest day on which it can roll forth amid the gayest scenes? who can name it? who has not seen it? It is a something imponderable, intangible, yet inevitable and continual: the brighter the day the surer the accompaniment; yet it is useless; it cannot be bought, it cannot be sold, it cannot be got rid of! that accompaniment is the chariot’s own shadow. What is true thus, in a merely physical and literal sense, is true in the highest moral relations. Everywhere there is a signature of disappointment or dissatisfaction. There is a tomb in every garden.

“If a man beget an hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years be many, and his soul be not filled with good, and also that he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth is better than he. For he cometh in with vanity, and departeth in darkness, and his name shall be covered with darkness. Moreover he hath not seen the sun, nor known any thing: this hath more rest than the other” ( Ecc 6:3-5 ).

Coheleth now gives another picture a man with a hundred children living many years, so many that he seems to have no burial, so far is death from the sunny scene; but this man’s soul is practically dead; so much so that Coheleth says that an untimely birth is better than he. The thing that is wanting is appetite, desire, relish, power of appreciation; the things are all beautiful, but the man does not care for them; he has lost all interest in the merriment of children, in the schemes of youth and the battles of manhood, and his palate has been sated with luxury and wine. The result of that satiety is tastelessness, so that all things come alike to his exhausted palate. Rinse the mouth with alum do not spare the alum; use it again and again, and once more; and then drink the richest wine of the richest vintage, and it is but so much ditch-water in the mouth. It is even so when desire faileth or the power of appreciation is gone; then the hundred children are a hundred burdens, and music is an irritating noise.

We are to understand, then, that desire dies, that appetite languishes and perishes, and consequently the things that please us now will some day have no charm for us. The woman of fancy was the liveliest girl of her day, a lover of all beauty, and brightest queen of the summer, the chief of singers, glad of the merry dance, and quick at humorous repartee; but the ploughshare has gone deep into her heart, and to-day her laugh is but a sigh of sadness, and the old springs of life that sparkled and flashed have been dried up by the hot sun. “So we ripe, and ripe; so we rot, and rot.”

But suppose a man should live a thousand years instead of a hundred? Well, let him live a thousand years twice told; this is a question which is not affected by time. Is there any use in watering a dead tree? Can any man make wine out of painted grapes? Can the cleverest man fill a sieve with water? Our digestion perishes; the faculty by which we lay hold of life with a view to life’s enjoyment decays, so that at last we have eyes but see not, ears but hear not, faculties unimpaired in form but utterly useless.

Now Coheleth asks a startling question:

“For what hath the wise more than the fool? what hath the poor, that knoweth to walk before the living?” ( Ecc 6:8 ).

It would certainly appear from the outside of things that the fool is as well off as the wise man. The fool can eat four meals a day can the wise man eat more? And in trial of character what hath the wise man more than the fool? It is as easy to assail the one character as the other. Nay, the impeachment brought against a wise man might in some quarters be more readily credited than if the same impeachment were brought against a fool. It is always thought possible by some minds that the greater the man the more surely must he have committed himself in some direction. Persons who would not pause to consider an accusation against a fool would constitute themselves into a jury to consider a case directed against a wise man. The wise man has more enemies than it is possible for the fool to have. The wise man is a continual rebuke to the ignorant, the narrow-minded, and the miscalculating. Society, in many of its departments, would not be sorry to get rid of the wise man, for his is an eye of criticism, and his a word of judgment. The man who can please is often more popular than the man who can instruct. The fancy that flashes is often more sought after than the understanding which can weigh and determine. This, of course, is a superficial view, and is not to be taken as Coheleth’s final summary of human life. He is simply reading appearances, and quickly annotating the daily pages of life as they are turned over by the hand of Time. He is giving us a photograph of the spirit of his day. This is a kind of news column. He himself was a wise man, and therefore would be the last to be content to be ranked with fools. The wise man has what the fool can never have: intellectual companionship, spiritual sympathy, speculations that call off the mind from parochial affairs, aspirations that would shake off all the dust and noise of a chaotic world, citizenship in spheres high and fair, where the light is pure, and the time is music, and every waft of air comes straight from the fountains of immortality. The wise man is never solitary. He sits in quietness, yet roams the field with the bold hunter, or dares the sea with the brave mariner. He makes his way through the crowd, his mind the while picking its more delicate way through mazes of divine philosophy, or up the winding steeps of knowledge, difficult of access. The fool is a hollow drum, tempting the rude staff of every grinning swain; the wise man is an oracle for consultation in perplexity and in grief. Do not, therefore, understand Coheleth as putting the wise man and the fool upon the same level. Coheleth means what he says when he exhorts his readers in these terms: “With all thy gettings, get understanding”; “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom.” By bringing these passages together we are enabled to see the purport of Coheleth’s criticism in this verse. He is rather relating the opinions of other men than giving his own judgment.

“Better is the sight of the eyes than the wandering of the desire: this is also vanity and vexation of spirit” ( Ecc 6:9 ).

Better is the seen than the invisible: “A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.” Why not make yourself contented with a present earth without aspiring to an uncertain heaven? To this inquiry we might reply that the earth first becomes an intolerable monotony, and then it becomes an incurable pain. When men ask, Why not be content with a present earth? they might as well say to a bird, Why not cut off your wings, and be satisfied to walk upon common ground? Here the mystery of instinct opens up its wide philosophy. We feel that there is more within us than can be satisfied with all that is grown upon the earth; and it is in response to this feeling that we utter great prayers, though sometimes we only designate them by the intellectual name of inspirations. God has set eternity in the soul. Man wants to have that eternity here, and he finds it impossible. We are drawn forward by eternity. It is a magnet which draws us by subtle and uncontrollable energy. Christ, however, teaches that eternity is the continuation of time, and that we are to be in the next world what we are already in this, only with enlarged faculty and purified desire.

Prayer

Almighty God, the morning is thine, and all the light, and the great Book, and the glory which burns in it. Thine is the house, and our song is in thy name, and our cry is unto thy mercy, and our eyes are turned towards the hills whence cometh our help. Behold the sacred occasion, and thou wilt not be wanting on thy part to make the fire glow, the flame ascend heaven-high, and our hearts to burn with new love, and our minds to rejoice in the light of newly-perceived truth. Thy part is never wanting; thou dost wait to be gracious; thou art more ready to give than we are to ask. If we are straitened, we are straitened in ourselves and not in God. We have not because we ask not, or because we ask amiss. We acquit the Holy One of Israel; we may not complain of our Father. Our sins have kept good things from us; our iniquities have gathered like a cloud between us and God, so that we do not see the light, or hear the song, or enter into the mystery of the higher fellowship. This is our doing, not thine; the separation is our sin, not thy decree of disregard for the human race. If we take our sins to ourselves, the burden is more than we can bear: but by penitence and broken-heartedness and hope in God, we are enabled to take the burden to the Cross, and there to lay it down, never to be resumed, a burden destroyed and cast into everlasting forget fulness. This is the triumph of the Cross; this is the success of the pierced hand in which there still lingers almightiness to save. Give us sweet consciousness of these facts; touch our minds with their wondrous mysteries; subdue our hearts by their marvellous pathos. Surround our lives with that sense of redeeming care which receives its highest, sublimest expression in the Cross of thine only Son. Let thy blessing come down upon us like showers that water the earth; let it steal in upon us with all gentleness and peacefulness, so that we know not that the door is opened to let it in until our hearts are conscious of its marvellous presence and benediction. Let the busy man remember that the kingdom of heaven is not in the dust; let the man who trifles with his time be assured of its brevity and uncertainty; let the hard heart that has never offered hospitality to the God that made it be broken but not with the tremendous hammer of thy righteousness, rather by the entreaty and the persuasion of thine unspeakable love. Now gather us, embrace us, draw us nearer to thy fatherly heart, make us at home in the wilderness, and give us great happiness in desert places; and at the last bring us every one, no wanderer lost, into the green paradise, the beautiful garden, the land of cloudless summer, washed in the blood of the Lamb, sanctified by the mighty energy of God the Holy Ghost, made fit for heaven’s light, and heaven’s sweet society. Amen.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXVII

OTHER METHODS APPLIED

Ecc 5:10-8:15 .

The fourth method applied was riches with the result that they were found to be insufficient because, (1) they cannot satisfy; (2) consumers of wealth increase with wealth; (3) the owner can only look at it; (4) he cannot sleep like & laborer; (5) riches may hurt the owner; (6) they may perish in an unlucky venture; (1) the owner begets a son when he is bankrupt; (8) in any event he is stripped of it all at death; (9) it causes him to lead a worried life.

The conclusion of this matter is found in Ecc 5:18-20 . According to this conclusion, it is good and comely for one to eat and drink and enjoy good in all his labor, but he must keep in mind that this is the gift of God; he will not much remember the days of his life, but it does not matter provided they were filled with the good which brings joy to his heart.

Another observation on riches is noted in Ecc 6:1-2 , viz: that the man who has immense wealth may not be able to eat of his bounty) and like one multimillionaire, may offer a million dollars for a new stomach, but there are some things that money cannot buy. He must stand by and see another consume what he has not the ability to enjoy. In Ecc 6:3-6 the author reasons that an untimely birth would be better than the condition of a man, blessed with a hundred children and a long life, if his soul be not filled with good.

The reasons assigned in Ecc 6:7-12 for this failure of riches are,

(1) All labor is for his mouth, therefore, the eternity in his soul cannot be satisfied in this way (Ecc 6:7-9 ).

(2) The greatest is but a man and cannot contend against God; neither can anyone tell man what shall be after him (Ecc 6:10-12 ).

The fifth method applied was the golden mean, on which he says that a good name is better than precious oil (Ecc 7:1 ); that it is better to go to the house of mourning than to the house of feasting, because sorrow makes the heart better (Ecc 7:2-4 ); that the reproof of the wise is better than the laughter of fools (Ecc 7:5-7 ); that the end of a thing is better than the beginning of it and the patient in spirit is better than the proud in spirit (Ecc 7:8 ); that it is not good to be hasty to get angry, for that is like a fool (Ecc 7:9 ); that we should not talk of “the good old days,” for this is not wise (Ecc 7:10 ); that wisdom is more excellent than wealth because wisdom preserves life to him that has it (Ecc 7:11-12 ); that it is not good to try to make all the crooked things straight (Ecc 7:13 ); that man should be joyful in his prosperity and considerate in his adversity, for they both come from God (Ecc 7:14 ); that since it sometimes happens that the righteous die while the wicked live, be not righteous over much, nor too wise, nor too wicked, nor too foolish, but hold somewhat to both (Ecc 7:15-18 ); that wisdom is stronger than ten rulers and this golden mean plan is great because there is not a righteous man in the earth that sinneth not (Ecc 7:19-20 ); that a man should not try to find out what people say about him, lest he might hear something bad about himself (Ecc 7:21-22 ).

The result of all this golden mean philosophy is that this theory is unsatisfactory and there is a higher wisdom attainable (Ecc 7:23-25 ). It is unsatisfactory because of its failure in the following particulars:

(1) Because woman is more bitter than death. There is one man of a thousand, though fallen, but there is not one woman of a thousand. Why? because he gave only one thousandth part of himself to each of them and for that reason he ought not to have expected a whole in return (Ecc 7:26-29 ).

(2) Because it is a failure when applied to public affairs (Ecc 8:1-9 ) saying, (a) Do not rebel, (Ecc 8:1-2 ); (b) Do not resent oppression (Ecc 8:3-4 ); (c) Leave the case to God’s retribution (Ecc 8:5-7 ) ; (d) The evil ruler will die and there is DO furlough in that warfare (Ecc 8:8 ).

(3) Because there are rulers who rule over men to their hurt (Ecc 8:9-10 ).

(4) Because the mills of the gods grind too slowly for the correction of this evil (Ecc 8:11-13 ).

(5) Because, though ultimately it is well with the righteous and evil with the wicked, yet here and now we do see wicked men get the crown of the righteous and vice versa (Ecc 8:14 ). The conclusion of all this, then, is that he commanded mirth, because he saw no better thing under the sun than for man to eat and drink and be joyful all the days of his life (Ecc 8:15 ).

QUESTIONS

1. What is the fourth method applied and with what results?

2. Why were riches insufficient?

3. What is the conclusion of this matter?

4. What is observation on riches noted in Ecc 6:1-2 and what reasonings based thereon in Ecc 6:3-6 ?

5. What reasons are assigned in Ecc 6:7-12 for this failure of riches?

6. What is the fifth method applied?

7. On this golden mean what says he of a good name?

8. What of the house of mourning and the house of feasting?

9. What of the reproof of the wise and the laughter of fools?

10. What of the beginning and end of a thing and the patient and proud in spirit?

11. What of anger?

12. What of “the good old days”?

13. What of the advantage of wisdom over wealth?

14. What of the crooked things?

15. What of prosperity and adversity?

16. What of the righteous and the wicked?

17. What of wisdom and rulers and why is this golden mean great?

18. What of things said about you?

19. What is the result of all this golden mean philosophy?

20. Why is this golden mean unsatisfactory?

21. What is the conclusion of all this?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Ecc 6:1 There is an evil which I have seen under the sun, and it [is] common among men:

Ver. 1. There is an evil that I have seen under the sun. ] This wretched life is so pestered with evils that the Preacher could hardly cast his eye beside one or other of them. A diligent observer he was of human miseries, that he might hang loose to life and the better press upon others the vanity of doting upon it. One would wonder, surely, that our life here being so grievously afflicted, should yet be so inordinately affected; and that even by those that are “in deaths often,” that have borne God’s yoke from their youth, that have suffered troubles without and terrors within, and who, if they had hope in this life only, were, by their own confession, of all men the most unhappy. 1Co 15:19 And yet so it is; God is forced to smoke us out of our clayey cottages, and to make life unto us to be nothing better than a lingering death, that we may grow weary of it, and breathe after a better, a where are riches without rust, pleasure without pain, youth without decay, joy without sorrow, Ubi nihil sit quod nolis, et totum sit quod velis, b where is all that heart can wish, &c. The skilful surgeon mortifieth with straigtht binding the member that must be cut off; so doth God fit us for our cutting off, by binding us with the cords of afflictions. “He crieth not when God bindeth him,” Job 36:13 saith Elihu of hypocrites; a generation of men, than the which nothing is more stupid and insensible; c till at length, God making forcible entry upon them, doth violently break that cursed covenant that they have made with death and hell, dash the very breath out of their bodies with one plague upon another, turn them out of their earthly tabernacles, with a firma eiectione, and send them packing to their place in hell, from which they would not be stopped by all those crosses that, for that purpose, he cast in their way.

And it is common among men. ] Proper to men, for beasts are not subject to this evil disease, and common to all sorts of men. One evil may well be common among many, when many evils are so commonly upon one. It happened to be a part of Mithridates’ misery, that he had made himself unpoisonable. And Cato so felt this miserable life, ut causa moriendi nactum se esse gauderet, d that he was glad of an occasion to go out of the world.

a Aeterna vita vera vita. – August.

b Bernard.

c Hypocritis nihil stupidius. – Pareus, Isa. xxviii.

d Cicero, in Tusc. quaest.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)