ECCLESIASTES

CHAPTER 5

MEN NEED GOD

Verses 1-7 reveal that men under the sun have need for God, and warn against impropriety in approaching the Almighty.

Verse 1 emphasizes the importance of readiness to hear and obey God, rather than follow the meaningless acts of fools, 1Sa 15:22.

Verses 2-3 warn against rash and vain repetitions of meaningless rites and words, Mat 6:7; Pro 10:19.

Verses 4-6 emphasize the importance of prompt and full compliance with vows made to God, and affirm that it is better not to vow than to vow and not fulfill the commitment. Such failure invites God’s anger and judgment eventually, if not immediately, Ecc 8:11; Ecc 12:14; Jon 2:9; Psa 116:14.

Verse 7 declares that in the many words and illusions of men under the sun there are also many vanities. The great need of men is to so reverence God that the inclination for vain utterances will be restrained, Ecc 12:13; Pro 1:7; Pro 9:10.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

WORSHIP IN THE HOUSE OF GOD

Ecc 5:1-20.

THE word Ecclesiastes is so much akin to ecclesia, the Greek for Church, that one naturally associates this Book with Christs Body, and in fact, there is a kinship of words, for Ecclesiastes means a convenor of assemblies.

It was evidently to the sessions of the Church that Paul referred when he pled with the Hebrews to not forsake the assembling of themselves together, as the manner of some was (Heb 10:25).

We should not be surprised, therefore, to find this fifth chapter dealing with the worship in the House of God; nor yet that it should contain some definite directions for the worshipers. The careful reader and the good listener will feel a degree of astonishment to discover that these directions are adequate to this day, illustrating what Solomon said in the previous chapter, I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever: nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before Him.

In other words, His work is perfect. Modernists would have us believe that we need to change both our method and message and keep them abreast of the times; but how can the Divine plan for redemption be changed? If it were ever adequate, it must for ever so remain. Mans sin, mans soul, and mans salvation change not. I have been wont to say that I had an unchangeable message, but that I kept my methods up to date. I am beginning to doubt the justification of my own remark, and to believe, more and more, that God not only gives us an unchangeable message in this Book, but that by the pen of inspiration, He plainly suggested also methods that would meet the conditions of every century, the demands of every millennium.

I shall therefore attempt the interpretation of this chapter in the light of that conviction, and under the suggestions (1) The Sacredness of the Sanctuary, (2) The Sense of God in the Same, and (3) The Source of all Good.

THE SACREDNESS OF THE SANCTUARY

It is to be entered in reverent spirit.

Keep thy foot when thou goest to the House of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil (Ecc 5:1).

It is neither forcing nor straining an interpretation of this Scripture to say that it suggests a quiet entrance to the House of God. Keep thy foot. Dont stomp in or about! Enter quietly! Dont enter talking, but rather be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of foolsspeech!

Mere ceremonialism finds little practice in the New Testament, and apart from the Divinely appointed ceremonies of the Lords Supper and baptism, no defense. But that Catholic and Episcopalian custom of entering the house of God reverently, quietly, and of kneeling in silent prayer the moment one has found his seat in the sacred place, is certainly in conformity with this Scripture, Keep thy foot when thou goest to the House of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools.

The Old Testament holy place was called Gods Sanctuary, and there are specific instructions against the possible profanation of the same. Only he shall not go in unto the veil, nor come nigh unto the altar, because he hath a blemish; that h# profane not My Sanctuaries: for I the Lord do sanctify them (Lev 21:23). The New Testament house cannot be less precious to Him, for it is alike the place of His special presence and by reason of that fact, a place that is holy.

I am not pleading this morning for one of those cold, dead churches in which a few people enter in silence, read the Scriptures in concert, give audience to a classical number, to a brief essay, and to the repetition of a printed prayer, and silently pass out to their respective dwellings. If silence were the sole characteristic of a Divinely approved assembly of individuals, then our cemeteries would be our ideal church. But I am expressing my personal conviction that one of our young women members, who has been absent from us for some months and who recently returned for a Sabbaths worship, was justified when she said, The congregation seems irreverent to me! Certainly there must be a sane and sanctified middle ground somewhere between the death that silences the cemetery and the jostle and conversation of the theater foyer.

The sanctuary is not the place for loud or idle speech.

Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in Heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.

For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fools voice is known by mulitude of words (Ecc 5:2-3).

The truth is clearly suggested here that wise men are not commonly wordy men, and that fools are rash with their mouths.

Theodore Roosevelt sold the description of his trip through Africa for $1.00 a word. Lloyd George has a contract for his autobiography at $5.00 a word. Elihu Root wrote a hundred word opinion of the late Marshall Fields will and the court allowed him $100,000 or $1000 a word. A Chicago life insurance man listened to a prospective client, while he told him of the careful provision he had made for the members of his family in the event of his death. At the end of the conversation, the insurance man said, You have forgotten your daughter! Five words! Instantly the client bought $100,000 worth of insurance, or $20,000 a word. Berlin wrote, My Wife Has Gone to the Country, and couldnt sell it to any publisher. He added two words, Hooray! Hooray! and immediately was offered $100,000 for the song, or $50,000 a word.

Words like money have their denominations. Some people employ them like mills; it takes ten of them to be worth a cent. Other people use them like coppers; it takes one hundred of them to be worth a dollar, and yet others deal in higher denominations, and a single word is worth its hundreds or thousands, and such people commonly employ them sparingly.

If you would have an illustration of this fact, study Lincolns Gettysburg address, an Emerson essay, or a Christ parable, or ex-President Coolidges answer to a news reporters questions.

I have long pled for cordiality in this church, and I crave it, for a kindly greeting of the stranger when he comes in, and my pleadings have met with only partial success. But I have long been convinced also, that our eternal, free visiting and long continued conversation with old-time friends at the close of the service, contributed nothing to it, but rather detracted from it, dissipating sacred impressions made. The text of the morning only the more confirms me in that judgment. Loudness of any sort does not become the sanctuary. Whenever I pass a place, dedicated to God, and listen to screeches emanating from the windows, I shudder with regret. You cant combine a house of worship and a house of mirth; a prayer house and a playhouse. I know of no instance on the face of the earth in which they have been successfully conducted together.

I was walking through a Baptist church in the city of Philadelphia where they were putting down a hard-wood floor, and the deacon apologetically explained that I might not approve, as they were arranging this for a dance room, and he added, The Doctor thinks we must get hold of the young people, to which I responded, My church house is crowded with young people and I would lose nine out of ten of them if I introduced such a feature, and the tenth that remained would have no respect for me.

Not many months since a church in the city of Minneapolis, professedly belonging to an evangelical denomination, put on what was called a Congo circus, and advertised in the newspapers with a two column cut of two young women dressed only in shorts, posing with hands clasped and uplifted knee to knee!. If Jesus Christ was angered when He found in the Temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting, and with a scourge of small cords, drove them all out of the Temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers money, and overthrew the tables, in His righteous wrath, saying, Take these things hence; make not My Fathers House an house of merchandise, what would He say if He came back to the modern church and found it sitting before a Sunday night picture show, or decorated with primeval forests and Indian garb and Indian life dramatized, or if you please, sitting through the maizes of a semi-nude Congo circus? There are people, who when they learn of audiences attending such performances, think that services of song and prayer and sermon are tame and that something ought to be done to attract the crowds. To all such suggestions we commonly make one answeran illustration. When Dr. P. S. Henson was pastor in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, some sixty years ago, a preacher across the street instituted a series of lectures on geology, filled the house with geological samples, and night after night held the various forms of rock before the eyes of his audiences to illustrate his nature series, and the crowds packed the place. A deacon of Dr. Hensons went to him and said, We must do something to get the crowds! That fellow over there is pulling our young people away! Whereupon Dr. Henson said, All right, deacon; we will do it. You perform your part, and I will perform mine, and we will lick that fellow to a finish. When I was a boy in Virginia I have stood on my head, many times, for fifteen minutes by the watch. I can do it again. You announce in the newspapers that I will preach a sermon of fifteen minutes in length, standing on my head, Sunday night, and you will see the crowds quit him and this place will overflow, to which the deacon replied, Pastor, pardon me! I am a fool. Preach the Gospel. Do as God has bidden you. Do nothing else, and if men will not come, if women will not hear, the responsibility is theirs, not yours!

The speech of the sanctuary should be seasoned with sacrifice.

When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for He hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast Vowed.

Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, them that thou shouldest vow and not pay.

Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?

For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God (Ecc 5:4-7).

Evidently, then, even in Old Testament times attendants upon the Sanctuary were expected to make sacrifice for the Sanctuary, to make vows and to pay their vows. Here again, methods have not changed. The support of the Sanctuary is with the people who worship in there. That support is problematical, perhaps impossible, apart from a pledge or a vow. This comes in consequence of failure to walk absolutely in keeping with the Word. If the tenth were retained as wholly unto the Lord, or if every New Testament saint followed literally and conscientiously Pauls injunction, and laid by him in store On the first day of the week as God hath prospered him, collections might not be a necessity. But even then great exigencies would arise. The scourge of famine, the wreck of pestilence, the destruction of fire, the oppression of poverty, would create special appeals and men and women would find themselves responsive to these agonizing demands and would rise in the sanctuary to make their vows, their promises of aid.

There are two motives that incite to vows. The first is the Christ-like, sacrificial motive of help, the same that obtained in the New Testament model church where they sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need (Act 2:45). The second is illustrated in that same Book of the Acts where Ananias and Sapphira in order to create a reputation for themselves for generosity, professed to have given more than they paid (Act 1:5). According to this text, there are few sins more offensive to God than the sin of a man who by loud vows makes a show of liberality, but who, when the show time is past, refuses to keep even so sacred a thing as a pledge to the cause of God; or as the text hints, declares that the amount named was misunderstood, an error, or that conditions have arisen that justify him in cancelling the same. We had a book a while ago on GOD AND THE GROCERYMAN Somebody needs to write one on the payment of vows to God and the groceryman. The fact is that what God needs is not so much our silver and gold as our spirit of sacrifice, our willingness to fill up of the sufferings of Christ, to endure hardship if need be for His Names sake.

It is related that Francis Xavier set out on his mission to the far East. Weary with his journey, he laid down at night and fell fast asleep, dreaming a dream. He saw clearly the hunger and thirst and cold and heat, the opposition, the persecution, the danger to life through which he must pass. He saw the mountains he must cross, the rivers he must swim, the deserts that he must tread. He beheld the enemies that were lying in wait for him in the form of beasts and men, and at the end of the dream, he saw plainly the violent death he was to die. Then he awoke, and reviewing it all, he said, Yet, I will go on; yet more, much more, Lord, would I endure for Thee!

Once in a while I meet a man who seems to regret what he has done for God, to grieve what he has invested in the church. Then dont invest! Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. Better thou shouldest not pay than pay unwillingly.

But fear thou God.

THE SANCTUARY AND THE SENSE OF GOD

Solomon continues his writing by emphasizing that sense. Fear thou God!

He presents Him as the final judge in matters of justice.

If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not at the matter: for He that is higher than the highest regardeth; and there be higher than they (Ecc 5:8).

In other words, the King of kings, the Creator of all creation, the God of all gods, the only God, regardeth.

There are a good many of us that fret ourselves over the oppressions of earth. We think of the prisons of America. Many of them are filthy and unfit for dogs, much less for men. We think of the criminal associations into which children are thrust when detected in a first offense. We think of the jails, reformatories and penitentiaries as schools of crime in which men are not corrected but cursed rather. We think of the injustice of the courts that will let the vilest murderer go free and send to the workhouse the poor old butter and egg man who has ignorantly parked his cheap car in the wrong place. We turn our eyes toward Russia and writhe with indignation at the slaughter carried on by Soviet rulers, and we often forget that for all of this men will be brought to judgment, and that for every instance of injustice God will pass final sentence, and the wicked shall not go unpunished.

Some of us are in revolt over the conditions existing in the city of Minneapolis. Certainly the pastor of the First Baptist Church is of that company. It is my candid conviction that unless something is done with the present police force of Minneapolis, our city will become the Mecca for murderers. When such infamous instances of murder as that of Dorothy Aune, the tailor in Northeast Minneapolis, and the Fort Snelling soldier are occurring, all of them within a few weeks, and not one man brought to trial even, it is little wonder that highwaymen back up trucks to down-town stores and loot them at pleasure; nor yet that other highwaymen who have some modicum of conscience left, should feel so sorry for the poor, weak Minneapolis police force as to go to headquarters and voluntarily pass up their pistols and surrender, as one man did this week.

But while one cannot condone such official dumbness and incapacity, nor do other than condemn such daily newspaper cowardice as brings no criticism of this police conduct, he can comfort himself in the fact that Dorothy Aunes murderer, the men or man who beat the poor old tailor in Northeast Minneapolis into a pulp in the hope of securing his hoarded riches, and the man who smote a young soldier and left him dying at his own room door, will each and everyone of them come to judgment and God Himself will sit as Judge and pass a just sentence.

I tell you, we have had so much of the unscriptural soft-soap teaching about the goodness of God with no reference to His justice, so much philosophizing about a self-created universe and the bestial law of evolution, that men have either lost altogether the thought of God or come to believe that there is no judgment that He will ever exercise, that oppressions result and violent perverting of judgment is the custom, and godlessness is the order of daily conduct. But Solomon says it, and more important still, with the pen of inspiration he wrote it down, He that is higher than the highest regardeth.

Again, Solomon reminds us that He is the Author and Arbiter of all wealth.

Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the king himself is served the field.

He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: this is also vanity.

When goods increase, they are increased that eat them: and what good is there to the owners thereof, saving the beholding of them with their eyes?

The sleep of a labouring man is sweet, whether he eat little or much: but the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep (Ecc 5:9-12).

Now here is a doctrine which the Church needs to understand. In this materialistic age, in this period of unprecedented wealth, in this hour when the passion for pleasure pulls men to all possible extremes, it is well to sound out afresh the fact that we are not the owners of the earth, but rather stewards of Gods wealth instead.

I know, and every man who is in any touch whatever with people of wealth, knows that they have to run the gauntlet successfully between the Scylla of pleasure seeking on the one side and the Carybdus of multiplied appeals on the other side. On the first side it is true, He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: this is also vanity! The heart of man can never be filled with material prosperity. The rich fool had no room where to bestow his goods, but he craved more. Wealth is a maw like the black giaour of Beckford and it growls eternally for more and more. On the other side, solicitors multiply, and my hearts sympathies go out to the people who have been blessed with considerable means, for they are the objects of attack by the hundreds. Every fellow who has any pet enterprise or notion that he thinks ought to be put forward follows the beaten path to their doors, and it is true that when goods increase, they are increased that eat them, and it often raises the question, What good is there to the owners thereof?

It is only the occasional man, the rare woman, that can pass through that straight and narrow way and miss greed on the one side and unwise giving on the other. That man, that woman is guided of God.

It might be well, however, to say in passing that many of us might have whereof to give if only we had rightly related ourselves to God. I have read somewhere the story of a little village in an eastern state that has not added a one to its population in a hundred years. It is beautiful for situation. Through the village runs a small river and within the village limits is a fall that carries in it the finest water power in the state. Yet for a century it has stood stock still. The reason is found in the fact that when a railroad was projected through that section of the state, it wanted the right to pass through this town, and the residents refused it. They were proud of their pretty shaded village and didnt propose to have its sightliness marred. The railroad, therefore, was compelled to take another route and they were left to arrested development. The man who refuses God right of way in his life who will not have Him come in, lest he should disturb some of his pleasures or plans, will wake up to discover that because God has passed around, he himself is left to poverty of spirit, a dwarfed soul indeed!

Mark further, God administers the worlds goods in equity.

There is a sore evil which I have seen under the sun, namely, riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt.

But those riches perish by evil travail: and he begetteth a son, and there is nothing in his hand. As he came forth of his mothers womb, naked shall he return to go as he came, and shall take nothing of his labour, which he may carry away in his hand.

And this also is a sore evil, that in all points as he came, so shall he go: and what profit hath he that hath laboured for the wind?

All his days also he eateth in darkness, and he hath much sorrow and wrath with his sickness (Ecc 5:13-17).

How foolish of us to be envious of the wicked when he spreadeth himself like a green bay tree. His pride period is short, for the wicked live out not half their days.

And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken (Job 38:15).

Thou hast rebuked the heathen, thou hast destroyed the wicked, thou hast put out their name for ever and ever (Psa 9:5).

That the wicked is reserved to the day of destruction? they shall be brought forth to the day of wrath (Job 21:30).

There is nothing more unchristian than to hate the wicked. We should pity them instead. For in all the universe of God, there is nothing more pathetic than is the fate of the wicked. Instead, therefore, of being jealous and envious, we should join God Himself in compassion and be able to say of their judgment as He declares of their death, We have no pleasure in it.

Finally

THE SOURCE OF ALL GOOD

Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely for one to eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour that he taketh under the sun all the days of his life, which God giveth him: for it is his portion.

Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; this is the gift of God.

For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answereth him in the joy of his heart (Ecc 5:18; Ecc 5:20).

God is the Grantor of all good. Our eating, our drinking, our joythese God gives. It is his portion. How strange that men supposed to be wise should often forget that fact!

Dr. Chapman tells of a certain man in Chicago who was supposed to be foolish. He stood on the streets day after day and begged alms and one bitter cold day he slipped into the rescue mission, and there heard of Jesus and was marvelously saved. He wore out three Bibles in three years. A newspaper editor, hearing of him, went to see him and found him in a garret, his Bible open on his knees; and the newspaper man said, Would you mind to read the Bible to me? The newly converted man read so eloquently that the newspaper man said, I had not heard the Bible read before. He read it with tears flowing from his eyes, and with a trembling in his voice. He stirred my soul till I could not restrain my own tears, and when he stopped, I said, Tell me if you will, what is the secret of your power? Shutting up his Bible, he looked me straight in the face and said, I will tell you. I have seen Jesus.

Oh, to see Him, to know Him; that is to appreciate all is from Him. Every good and every perfect gift, every joy and rejoicing, yea, every breath one breathes, God giveth.

God is also the Giver of all gold.

Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; this is the gift of God (5:19).

There are a great many people who, when they get into financial trouble, look to their fellows for financial help. These same often look in vain. It is not always so that our friends want to help. Even when they do it is not always possible for them to help.

When the submarine S-4 was rammed and went down to the bottom in 102 feet of sea water, it carried down forty men; thirty-four of them were supposed to have been instantly killed, but six of them survived for hours. One of the lads tapped out with a hammer in the international code, Can you do anything for us? The answer was not reassuring. Later the hammer, by a weakened hand, tapped out again, Is there any hope? Thirty-five broadcasting stations stood by for one minute and one hundred million people were asked to pray for those doomed boys. But men could do nothing for them and they perished.

But there are hundreds of thousands of our fellows imprisoned in greater depths, namely, the depths of iniquity; held in greater horrors, namely, the horror of hell, and we can do something for them if we will. We can carry to them the knowledge of the liberty that is in Christ. We can convey to them that Divine alchemy, the Word of Life, which can change death to life. The question then for us today is, What will we do for them?

Finally, God is the Author of all joy.

For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answereth him in the joy of his heart.

Why then should we shut Him out of life and so cheat ourselves of joy temporal, and rejoicing eternal?

Let me conclude with the story of the little girl who came home from a Gospel meeting where they had sung,

Knocking, knocking, who is there?

Waiting, waiting, oh how fair.

She said to her mother, Mother, I dont think that that hymn ends right.

Why not, dear?

Well, it leaves the Saviour outside. And so she repeated the last verse:

Oh, the pierced hand still knocketh,

And beneath the locks of hair

Beam the patient eyes so tender

Of thy Saviour waiting there.

I dont think it ought to end like that, and off she went to her room. Two hours later she returned, and said, There, mother, it ought to end like that. Her mother took the paper and in astonishment read,

Enter in, Heavenly Guest;

Welcome, welcome to my breast.

I have long withstood Thy knocking,

For my heart was full of sin.

But Thy love hath overcome me,

Blessed Jesus, Oh come in!

Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley

CRITICAL NOTES.

Ecc. 5:1. Thy foot] The outward movement, as showing the tendency of the heart. The sacrifice of fools] Some unworthy satisfaction of the religious ideaan offering whose purpose is merely to please God, and to serve as a salve for the conscience. They consider not that they do evil] Theirs is the error of simple ignorance rather than of any intention to deceive.

Ecc. 5:2. Rash with thy mouth] Refers to the repetition of unmeaning wordsmere babbling.

Ecc. 5:3. The multitude of business] Lit. of annoyancethe worries of life disturbing the mind, and giving rise to restlessness and dreams.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Ecc. 5:1-3

THE ETHICS OF DIVINE WORSHIP

The Royal Preacher enters upon a new object of thought. Happiness is only to be found in religion, and the most exalted act of religion is worship. The solemn services of the house of God demand duty from the worshipper.

I. We must avoid an unintelligent worship. God must be acknowledged in His relations to us as communities. Hence to attend His house for the purpose of worship is a solemn duty. Some cautions must be observed, if the service of the sanctuary is to be acceptable. The worship should be intelligent; marked by all the cautiousness, deliberation, and sobriety of thought. There are three principal classes of offenders against this requirement.

1. Those who worship simply from custom. They are not governed by the deep reasons of this sacred duty, but without due reflection follow what is considered to be a common obligation. Hence they go with careless feet, walking in the ruts of custom. They are imitators of others. Their devotion is soullessmechanical.

2. Those who worship with a pre-occupied mind. The mind being filled with other objects, thought wanders, and the worship is but languidly performed.

3. Those who in the act of worship are not completely possessed with a solemn purpose. One great purpose must carry away the soul of the worshipper. The service of worship demands the concentration of thought and feeling. The soul, like the feet, must not wander in uncertainty, but go straight to her solemn purpose.

II. We must avoid a Barren Worship. The worship is not to end in itself, as if external homage were all that was required of us. It must have issue in quickened spiritual power, and practical duty. No barren or unproductive worship is acceptable.

1. The end of worship is to stimulate to obedience. (Ecc. 5:1.) To hear in the language of the O.T. signifies to obey, i.e., to hear with the inner ear. Thought is awakened that it might lead to action. The sense of the Divine presence summons to duty. Obedience is the proper vesture of the thoughts and feelings roused in the sanctuary.

2. Worship without obedience has no rational ground. The adoration of the Divine Nature implies a respect for those laws of duty which are but an expression of that nature. A sacrifice, therefore, without obedience is but the sacrifice of a fool. It has no solid reason to go upon. Such worship is but a careless effort; without any wise design or sure aim.

3. Worship without obedience is sometimes the result of ignorance. It does not always arise from a pure and unmixed attempt to deceive, or to act the hypocrite. Some deceive themselves. They, being ignorant of the true way of religion, imagine that outward service will atone for many follies and sinsthat the whole reckoning with heaven can thus be closed. This is the folly of many religionsthey are but a salve for the conscience.

III. We must avoid an Irreverent Worship. Reverence is essential to all true worship. It is the proper attitude of man before the Supreme. In order to secure the spirit of reverence, we must attend to certain rules of duty in worship.

1. Be careful in the employment of words. (Ecc. 5:2.) Rash and hasty words are here forbidden. This is not meant to check devotion, or to cool the ardour of the soul by some formal and severe requirement. It is opposed

(1) To empty words. These are uttered without solemn reflectionempty phrases, possessing but little meaning for the worshipper. They are mere words, spoken without due considerationrash. It is opposed

(2) To superficial words. They do not proceed from the inner depths of the soul. They are quickly uttered, and in any required number, as involving no expense of thought or feeling. Words that are not winged by the souls desire cannot rise to heaven. It is opposed

(3) To all useless repetitions. It is not a fatal defect in prayer that it is marked by some repetition, for the soul may love to linger upon a thought to make her desire more emphatic, or to express intense emotion. The habit censured is the regarding mere words as possessing meritthat their multitude can atone for sin, and make compromise for the high demands of duty. To avoid irreverence, we must

2. Have a proper sense of the majesty of the object of worship. We have to remember that God dwells in unapproachable glory, far beyond the reaches of our mind; and that we are upon the earththe scene of ignorance, error, sin, and want. With such a conviction, the language we utter before high heaven will be marked by brevity of expression. A sense of reverence will impose on us a solemn reserve. The employment of few and careful words most befits the sacred act of worship.

(1) Because this is the method of true passion. The most powerful feelings discharge themselves in few, simple, and direct expressions. True passion disdains the long array of words.

(2) Because it suits the nature of the duty. The silent awe and admiration proper to worship must not lose their effect through the intrusion of the multitude of words. When in the presence of a Superior Being, reserve and caution are the most commendable qualities of speech.

(3) Because it is agreeable to the best examples. The prayers recorded in the Bible are brief, and expressed in words of simple majesty. The Lords Prayer is marked by fulness in little compass.

3. Have a proper sense of the evil of careless speech in devotion. It has a bad effect upon the soul. The language degenerates into weakness and twaddle. Devotion becomes a mere babble of words involving no serious effort of intellect or heart. As dreams often arise from the perplexing cares and business of the daythese, in a confused manner, presenting themselves in sleepso the multitude of words, though uttered not without some carefulness at first, at length degenerates into confusion and unreality. (Ecc. 5:3.)

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES

Ecc. 5:1. The feet translate the dispositions of the mindthey are the outward indicators of purpose.

There is a proper frame and disposition of the soul before engaging in worship. On the way to the house of God, the worshipper should be acquiring a readiness for its solemn services.
The royalty of the Supreme King demands a careful, reverent, and subdued manner in those who approach his Majesty.
Obedience is the most splendid issue of the adoration of the fount of law. Duty is our clearest revelation, and the path to our true honour.
The worship of God is a reasonable service, demanding the best fruit of the intellect and heart. He who does not make it a thoughful and heartfelt exercise presents the sacrifice of a fool.
It is the simplicity of the heart, and not of the head, that is the best indictor of our petitions. That which proceeds from the latter is undoubtedly the sacrifice of fools; and God is never more weary of sacrifice than when a fool is the priest and folly the oblation [South].

The vanity, hollowness, and insincerity of the outward world intrudes even into the temples of religion.
In the spirit of that significant Oriental usage which drops its sandals at the palace door, the devout worshipper will put off his travel-tarnished shoeswill try to divest himself of secular anxieties and worldly projectswhen the place where he stands is converted into holy ground by the words, Let us worship God [Dr. J. Hamilton.]

Ecc. 5:2. The tongue of the worshipper should not outstrip the fervours of his heart. Unless the words of devotion glow with the inner heat, they are but empty sounds.

It is an affront to the Majesty of Heaven to offer the unripe fruit of our mind and heart.
The multitude of words in prayer does not imply deep thought and fervour of devotion. They are but the tawdry garment that covers the poverty of the soul.
Before Job saw God with the inner eye, he was loquacious, but after sight of the Divine vision, his words were ended, and afterwards he only opened his mouth to declare how he abhorred himself.
He who regards the pure splendour in which God dwells, and the humble platform on which he himself stands, will render his devotion in few and careful words.
A heap of unmeaning words only smothers the fires of devotion.
Remember at whose throne you are kneeling; and be not verbose, but let your words be few and emphatic, as of one who is favoured with an audience from Heavens King. When the emergencies of lifesome perplexity or sorrow, some deliverance or mercy,at an unwonted season sends us to the Lord, without any lengthened preamble we should give to this originating occasion the fulness of our feelings and the foremost place in our petitions [Dr. J. Hamilton].

The Lords Prayer begins by reminding the petitioner of the lofty dwelling-place of that Being whom he addresses, yet this august Majesty of heavenly state is tempered by the endearing name of Father.
What a wide application may be made of these words both to teaching and preaching, to prayer and to our ordinary life! How many sermons, hours long, would be expunged by this censorship, though never so skilfully arranged and put together according to the preaching art. And if all sermons and other discourses concerning Divine things were purged from all useless, unedifying, fruitless, offensive, and wrong words, how few would the censorship leave standing! [The Berleburger Bible].

Ecc. 5:3. Tertullian, expressing the nature of dreams, saith, Behold a fencer without weapons, a coach-driver without his running chariot, acting and practicing all the postures and feats of his skill. There is fighting, there is stirring, but it is an empty moving and gesturing. Those things are done in the acting of them, but not in the effecting anything by them. So it is in many words; there is often much fencing, but no weapons wherewith the enemy is wounded; there is much running, but no chariot winneth the race; much seemeth to be said, but it is to as much purpose as if nothing were said; all is an empty moving of the tongue [Jermin].

All speech that does not commence upon the solidities of truth is unsubstantial as a dream, the multitude of words only making the disordered mixture more bewildering.
The fools prayer is composed oftriflesmeaningless and unreal.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

D. GUIDELINES FOR THE WORK OF WORSHIP Ecc. 5:1-9

1. Watch your step in Gods house. Ecc. 5:1 a

TEXT 5:1a

Ecc. 5:1 a Guard your steps as you go to the house of God,

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 5:1a

114.

Since vanity is still under consideration, where are we now to guard against it?

115.

What would the house of God be in Solomons day?

116.

Why should one guard his steps when going to the temple?

PARAPHRASE 5:1a

Watch your step when you come to the temple. Remember it is Gods house.

COMMENT 5:1a

For the first time the Preacher resorts to admonition. It is direct and extended. He is concerned about the possible corruption of the heart as it reaches toward God in worship. He is observing the citizenry making their way to the temple, turning their feet toward the proper places, and moving through the correct procedures. However, he is also aware that their approach is more formalistic than genuine, more ritualistic than contrite. Since God is the object of worship and therefore has ultimate worth, to worship Him in word only would be ultimate folly. The house of God is undoubtedly the temple as the synagogue has not been established, and there was not a plurality of houses where God was worshiped.

Guard your steps is to be taken figuratively for examining your heart. Make sure your motives are pure and in line with your external orthodoxy. The Preacher is not implying that one should not approach God in the temple or that external acts are unimportant. He is suggesting that it is possible to give the appearance of worshiping God correctly when actually nothing is happening between you and God. The vanity of hypocritical worship is but another illustration of the vanity of all things. It is likely that his insertion of vain worship at this particular place has a very definite purpose. It is because men are out of step with God that they are out of step with one another. An improper approach to worship leads to the inequitable situation discussed in chapters one through four and also the illustrations which follow. God may be supplanted by numerous other loves. The Preacher is extremely pointed in this application (cf. Ecc. 5:8-10). We are drawn to the evil activities of men which undoubtedly result from an improper attitude in Gods house. Men oppress the poor, deny justice and righteousness, and have an unhealthy love for money and abundance. One way to escape the futility of the things of this world is to be in harmony, in act and spirit, with the will of God.

Much is made of this passage by those who hold to a late date and non-Solomonic authorship. It is argued that the short-lived joy and dedication of the people to the things of God after the Exile was but a flush of enthusiastic faith. The people soon developed a hardening of heart. One could see the outward signs of worship were in harmony with the rules, but the spirit of the act was far from what God desired. They cite such passages as Neh. 13:10-20 and Mal. 1:8 as evidence. One could not argue successfully against the lack of spiritual sincerity on the part of Israel, for it is manifestly denounced in the Minor Prophets. However, to conclude that such hypocrisy was limited to that particular generation, and that the rebuke and admonition of the Preacher would not be just as applicable in Solomons day, is also indefensible. As a matter of fact, men in every generation have been guilty of meaningless sacrifices in worship. From the time of Cain and Abel to the present day the history of man has been the same in respect to worship. Every age needs a clear voice calling men back to outward form and inward feeling; to truth and spirit; but not only to sacrifice, but a detailed adherence to the will of the One to whom the sacrifice is offered. Read 1Sa. 15:22; Isa. 1:10-17; Jer. 7:33; Pro. 21:3; Mar. 12:40. Surely in the day of Solomon, with the corruption of justice and the erection of altars of false gods on the very soil of Israel, there was a need to admonish men to greater consistency in their performance in the house of God. Similar instruction is found in Pro. 1:15-16 where Solomon indicates that the direction of ones steps betrays the intent of the heart.

FACT QUESTIONS 5:1a

204.

What is it that now concerns the preacher as he observes the citizenry?

205.

Identify the house of God. Why would it not be the synagogue?

206.

How should one understand the admonition to guard your steps?

207.

What is likely the reason for the insertion here concerning the need to worship God correctly?

208.

List the sins listed or suggested in Ecc. 5:8-10. What proper attitude would eliminate this evil?

209.

How would you meet the argument that this type of hypocrisy had to be during the time of Malachi?

210.

Give evidence that men have always had a tendency to go through acts of worship, but in doing so failed to do all that God commanded.

211.

What does Solomon suggest may be learned concerning ones intentions by simply watching the direction of the feet?

2. Refrain from making a sacrifice of fools through hasty words. 5:17
TEXT 5:1b7

1b

and draw near to listen rather than to offer the sacrifice of fools; for they do not know they are doing evil.

2

Do not be hasty in word or impulsive in thought to bring up a matter in the presence of God. For God is in heaven and you are on the earth; therefore let your words be few.

3

For the dream comes through much effort, and the voice of a fool through many words.

4

When you make a vow to God, do not be late in paying it, for He takes no delight in fools. Pay what you vow!

5

It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay.

6

Do not let your speech cause you to sin and do not say in the presence of the messenger of God that it was a mistake. Why should God be angry on account of your voice and destroy the work of your hands?

7

For in many dreams and in many words there is emptiness. Rather fear God.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 5:1b7

117.

Give evidence that the sacrifice of fools is evil.

118.

How can one commit evil and not know it? Discuss.

119.

What reason is given why one should not be hasty or impulsive?

120.

What is likened unto a dream?

121.

What is likened unto much effort?

122.

List numerous vows taken by Christians today. Are some of these the sacrifice of fools? Discuss.

123.

What is it that God does not delight in?

124.

When is it better not to vow?

125.

In what way can your speech cause you to sin?

126.

Since the temple is the house of God, who is the messenger?

127.

What is the opposite of speaking many words?

PARAPHRASE 5:1b7

Approach the house of God with a spirit that prepares your heart to be slow to speak but swift to hear. A man is a fool who offers God empty words. Such a man offers the sacrifice of fools, and he is not even sensitive concerning his evil deeds. It is improper for you to stand before God and speak without seriously weighing your words. Think! It will benefit your sacrifice if you remember the differences between God and you. He is in heaven, and you are upon the earth! Very likely you will be a man of few words if you keep that truth in mind.
When one engages in many different activities during the day and is occupied with busy work, he will toss and turn upon his bed, and his head will be filled with dreams. Also, a fool is known by his much talk. A fool is also known by making meaningless vows before God. If you do make a vow, dont be late in paying it! God doesnt delight in fools. Pay what you vow to pay. Consider this; it is actually better that you do not vow than vow and do not pay.
It is the problem of your tongue again. Your speech can cause you to sin. Think about that. And consider, too, that it wont help to run to the priest of God and say that it was all a big mistake. The priest will be there to collect what is now rightfully Gods, and you will find no escape. Why should God be made angry by your many words and you find the work of your hands destroyed?
Let it be a warning to youdreams and meaningless promises are feasting on the wind and empty. Simply show respect to God!

COMMENT 5:1b7

The purpose of this section is to prevent one from acting the part of a fool in the most important of all activities of men. One is personally responsible for his own behavior when he comes before God. Evidently one can rise above the circumstances around him and behave in such a way that will number him among the wise. It is to the wise, or the potentially wise, that the Preacher addresses himself as he suggests that one should not be shocked at what he sees in the perversion of worship or justice (Ecc. 5:8)just be certain that you guard your steps as you go to the house of God.

The activities of the fool as described in this section are not to be emulated. The reader has been introduced to such fools before (cf. Ecc. 4:5; Ecc. 4:13). It is a term which suggests stupidity and ignorance rather than evil or brutishness. It does not carry the idea of one who is perverted or wicked, but rather one who is lacking in common sense and the ability to do things correctly. Note the following characteristics of the fool that the wise man will avoid: The fool fails to listen to God; he offers an unacceptable sacrifice; he is ignorant of his own evil activities and is hasty and impulsive in his speech; he fails to remember that he is the created one and God is the Creator; he expends pointless energy in meaningless activities; he is either late in paying or fails to pay the vow he made to God; more than this, he made the vow even though he realized that he would not be able to pay it; he attempts to go back on his word, making God angry with him and thus having his work destroyed; he discovers that both his dreams and promises are empty; and, in addition to all of this, he fails to fear God which is the ultimate duty of man (Ecc. 12:13).

Ecc. 5:1 One does not see a picture of a hardened, rebellious, heretic who sets himself against God and is in opposition to all that is holy. The individual observed as a fool attends worship. He is not a fool because he comes to stand before God, but because he does not come to listen, but to talk. And in the talking he yields to the temptation to promise much more than he is capable of delivering. James undoubtedly had these words in mind when he wrote, But let every one be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God (Jas. 1:19-20). The leaders of Israel had a solemn responsibility to read the Law to the people. In like manner, the people had a solemn responsibility to listen to the Law. One of the last acts of Moses was to command the people to observe all the words of the Law. The reading, hearing, and observing of the Law, preceded the ability to fear the Lord. Moses said, Assemble the people, the men and the women, and the children and the alien who is in your town, in order that they may hear and learn and fear the Lord your God, and be careful to observe all the words of this law. And their children, who have not known will hear and learn to fear the Lord your God, as long as you live on the land where you are about to cross over the Jordan to possess it (Deu. 31:12-13).

To draw near to listen would be tantamount to bringing their behavior into harmony with the expressed will of God. This would mean that the many grievous sins being committed throughout the land would cease. To hear God has the same force as obeying God. (Cf. 1Sa. 15:22; Jer. 7:33; Hos. 6:6.) The foolishness depicted is heightened because the one who offers the sacrifice of fools has not stopped long enough to listen to find out what he should be doing, and he is thus ignorant of the fact that he is doing evil.

The sacrifice of fools is not a sacrifice of blood or physical substance. It is rather the words hastily and impulsively offered to God. It would include promises which cannot be kept or meaningless chatter that slips so easily from the lips but never finds its way through the heart. Evidently words have always been considered sacrifices to God. When one comes to God through Jesus Christ, he should be aware that he continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to his name (Heb. 13:15).

Ecc. 5:2 The goal here is to keep your words few and mean what you say. The motivation for making your word sacrifice a thoughtful one is the fact that you are standing in the presence of God. It is the Creator that you have come to worship. You have been instructed where to go and what to do when you arrive. Now, dont play the part of a fool and negate your worship act. To bring up a matter suggests that what is about to be discussed originates from the imagination of the worshiper rather than from the command of God. Since God has not commanded the vow, perhaps it would be better if you did not make it.

Sacrifices of fools are not limited to hasty promises. Vain repetitions, which of course are repeated without feeling and become just so many empty words, are also considered unacceptable sacrifices before God (Mat. 6:7).

There isnt any doubt in the mind of the Preacher that God and man are not equal. The strong assertion of this verse that God is in heaven and you are on the earth, clearly manifests the distinction between God and men. The temple was built for God, not man. The worship is before God, not man. The fool is man, not God. The entire context indicates an awareness that the author is cognizant of Gods preeminence. The fact that he speaks of man being of the earth implies that he was created from dust and therefore should not forget his rightful place. It is on the basis of this distinction between God and man that he makes his appeal. When man comes before God his words should be few. This same idea is under consideration in Ecc. 6:10. Here Solomon argues that man (Adam) knows that he came from the ground (adamah). He states it clearly when he says it is known what man is. It is in the light of this argument that his appeal is to the common sense of the one who has been created. Such a one should keep his guard up when he comes before the Creator and protect himself against the temptation to offer the sacrifice of fools.

A classic example in contrast between the fool who cries loud and long for his god to hear and the one who comes before God in correct fashion is given in 1Ki. 18:25-40. Here the prophets of Baal cried from morning until noon and again they raved until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice. Yet the account states, there was no voice, no one answered, and no one paid attention. In what took less than twenty seconds for Elijah to speak before God, he offered a meaningful prayer that resulted in fire falling from the Lord which consumed his sacrifice, along with the wood and the stones and the dust and licked up the water that was in the trench.

Ecc. 5:3 It is because of the multitude of business or the task in which the individual is embroiled that he dreams. The dream, which is an experience that is shared by most, is declared in this instance to be the result of much activity. In like manner, a man is discovered to be a fool because of his many words. Dreams are not necessarily the mark of a fool but stand in this instance only as a comparison to illustrate his point. Once more he is insisting that our words should be few.

Ecc. 5:4-6 He now turns from the subject of prayer to that of vows. One is considered a fool if he is either late in paying his vow to God or fails to pay it. In either situation, God does not find pleasure in such activity, or lack of it! As noted above, the vow stems from the mind of the worshiper and not from God. Vows were not a part of Gods commands and the laws governing them so indicate. When you make a vow to the Lord your God, you shall not delay to pay it, for it would be sin in you, and the Lord your God shall surely require it of you. However, if you refrain from vowing, it would not be sin in you. You shall be careful to perform what goes out from your lips, just as you have voluntarily vowed to the Lord your God, what you have promised (Deu. 23:21-23).

There is a time when it is better not to vow. Such a time obviously, is when you vow but do not fulfill it. A promise is binding among men of integrity. How much more so a promise before God! Yet, if God does not command the promise, how foolish is one who makes promises that he neither intends to keep nor has the ability to keep.
Vows have come into vogue among many churches today. There are faith-promise rallies, faith-care rallies, and numerous methods of either raising financial commitments or time and/or talent commitments through the use of special days and programs. Whereas there is nothing wrong with such activities, and in many churches much good results from them, a proper text in preparing the people to come before God with their promise would certainly be the passage under consideration here. Sometimes zeal in promoting for new records and higher goals exceeds wisdom exercised in the practical application of attaining them. The Preacher has a wise word for the church today: It is better that you should not vow than that you should vow and not pay.

The idea of your speech in verse six could just as easily be mouth, or tongue. Yet, Jesus taught that it is indeed the heart that causes one to sin (Mar. 7:21). The heart in this instance finds expression through the mouth and more specifically in the form of a hasty vow. Now, new words must be formed as you come before the messenger of God (the priest) and confess that it was indeed a mistake! However, both the irresponsible vow and the appeal to the priest are to be avoided. The priest acts only as a representative between you and God. This is why God is angry at your appeal and not the priest. Your vow was made to God and now the covenant has been established. God expects payment. To utter such a vow or make such an appeal places one in the position that his words cause God to become angry with him. Gods anger is now directed toward the individual (fool), and nothing he does will succeed. God destroys the work of his hand. The one in Solomons day could expect some act of judgment from the Lord. Not all evil was immediately recompensed, however, and thus the ones who were guilty of offering the sacrifices of fools continued in such activity for a time (Ecc. 8:11).

Verse seven is a summary. It captures both the idea of empty prayers and empty vows and admonishes toward a more positive, fruitful activity: fear God. It is not to be assumed that the Preacher considers everyone who reads his message as guilty before God. He is suggesting that there are those who will follow the foolish ways and that one should avoid that pathway. In Wisdom Literature, the concept of fearing God has a marked prominence in the priorities of men and also a distinct meaning. It is both the doing of good and the departing from evil. David wrote, Come, you children, listen to me; I will teach you the fear of the Lord. Who is the man who desires life, and loves length of days that he may see good? Keep your tongue from evil, and your lips from speaking deceit. Depart from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it (Psa. 34:11-14).

Solomon has now completed his discourse on formalistic worship and the futility of such. He ends the discussion with a positive emphasis. He declares that the better way is to fear God. He has given sufficient cause why one is indeed a fool should he follow the way of thoughtless, insincere prayers or vows. Strong religious terminology such as God, temple, priest, sin, vows, and sacrifice, offer a marked and inescapable relationship to religious behavior. Perhaps his appeal is more direct and carries the feeling of admonition because of the seriousness of the matter. Nothing is of graver consequence than mans relationship to God. Perhaps he could not refrain from preaching in the light of this truth.

FACT QUESTIONS 5:1b7

212.

What is the most important of all activities of men?

213.

One should not be shocked at perversion in what two areas?

214.

What does the term fool imply in this context?

215.

List the ten characteristics of fools as described in this section.

216.

What temptation does the fool yield to as he stands before God?

217.

According to Jas. 1:19-20, the fool should have followed what advice?

218.

What objective did Moses have in mind when he commanded the people to always have Gods law read publicly?

219.

To hear God is equal to what?

220.

What is the sacrifice of fools?

221.

How could one negate his worship act?

222.

Give evidence that Solomon does not think of man as equal with God.

223.

How long did Elijah speak before God?

224.

How long did the prophets of Baal cry to their god?

225.

Are dreams the mark of a fool? Discuss.

226.

In the making of vows, when would one be considered a fool?

227.

Does the vow originate in the mind of the worshiper, or is it a command of God? Discuss in the light of Deu. 23:21-23.

228.

When is it better not to vow?

229.

Jesus taught that evil issues from what area?

230.

Why, then, does Solomon say that your speech causes you to sin?

231.

Who is the messenger of God?

232.

Define the fear of the Lord. (Cf. Psa. 34:11-14.)

233.

Why does Solomon turn to preaching in this section?

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

V.

(1) In the Hebrew division this is the last verse of the preceding chapter; but clearly here a new section begins, containing proverbs in the second person singular, which has not hitherto been used. There is no obvious connection with what has gone before; possibly the precepts here introduced were traditionally known to have been part of Solomons teaching.

They consider not.The most natural translation of this clause would be, They know not how to do evil, i.e., are incapable of doing evil. This would force us to understand the subject of the clause to be, not the fools, but those who are ready to hear. The Authorised Version exhibits one of the expedients resorted to in order to get a better meaning. Another is, They are without knowledge, so that they do evil.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

1. Keep thy foot Behaviour is in the Bible frequently presented under the figure of walking and running. Keeping the feet implies caution in deportment, as opposed to a bold recklessness.

Ready to hear The remainder of this verse is difficult of translation. The rendering severely demanded by the Hebrew is, To obey is nearer as a way to God’s favour than to offer the sacrifice of the perverse, for they [who obey] have no consciousness of doing evil. In this construction some of the best scholars agree; and while it is the most careful translation, it is clear in its significance. Samuel said to Saul, “Obedience is better than sacrifice, and to hearken, than the fat of rams.”

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Chapter 5 True Religion and Worship. The Problem of Riches. The Good Life.

The Importance of True Worship ( Ecc 5:1-7 ).

This chapter now begins with one of those periods in The Preacher’s musings when he seems for a short period to break through the veil of meaninglessness. Here he considers man approaching God, with true seeking, true worship, and contact with the heavenly, that men might learn to fear God more (Ecc 5:7). It is contact with everlastingness.

It is the first time that the Preacher has considered temple worship. But the way it is naturally introduced demonstrates that we are to see it as a part of the background to all he says. And he speaks wisely. Man should approach God thoughtfully, ready to hear and learn. God is the teacher. Man is the suppliant. He obviously here considers that a man can know God. Here is the previous godly man Ecc 2:24-26 now involved in worship. For a while his pessimism is in abeyance.

Ecc 5:1-2

‘Guard your steps (literally ‘your foot’) when you go to the house of God, for it is better to draw near to hear than to give the sacrifice of fools. For they know not that they do evil. Do not be rash with your mouth, and do not let your heart be hasty to utter anything before God, for God is in heaven and you are on the earth, therefore let your words be few.’

For the first time The Preacher considers man’s worship. In it man is approaching heaven, he is approaching everlastingness. But he has already said that God’s ways are unknowable. Thus man should approach God with care and reverence. He should guard his steps, he should draw near to hear what God would say to him. He should stay with what God has revealed about Himself to His prophets (Abraham, Moses and so on). He should draw near ready to obey (see 1Sa 15:22). This is far better than simply approaching God with thoughtless ritual.

Many offer the sacrifice of fools. They do not consider themselves sinful and yet they offer a sin offering. They are not offering themselves to God and yet they offer a whole burnt offering. They are not grateful to God and yet they offer a thankoffering. These are the sacrifices of fools. They do it simply because it is the thing to do. But it will not impress God. In contrast with those who guard their steps, these simply ‘trample His courts’ (Isa 1:11-12). The fool in practise does not know God (Psa 14:1).

‘They know not that they do evil.’ This may mean that they come carelessly, unaware of their sinfulness. Or it may mean that their very casual approach is in itself seen as evil. Both are in fact true.

But if a man comes rightly to God with a hearing ear, will he not learn something meaningful? It would seem so. There is no suggestion of all this being vanity here. But he must come wisely. He must not indulge himself in a multitude of words, he must not speak without careful thought, what he speaks should have been carefully weighed up. For he is approaching the One Who is in the heavenly realm, the One Whose ways cannot be ferreted out, The One Who is everlasting, who is in direct contrast with those who are on the earth. Therefore his words should be few. He is there to learn and to hear. He should say little.

Thus for a brief period The Preacher appears to acknowledge that there are meaningful things to learn, even though man cannot fully find out God. He is gradually approaching his moment of enlightenment.

How wise The Preacher was. These are word to which we should all take heed. The church is full of those who know God’s mind better than He knows it Himself, in ways that He has not clearly revealed. We would often do better to be silent and admit how little we really know of God than to speak boldly and mislead. It would have saved much suffering.

He goes on to expand his meaning.

Ecc 5:3

‘For a dream comes with a multitude of business, and a fool’s voice with a multitude of words.’

Men who are too busy with a multitude of activity, including ritual activity, without stopping to hear, simply come up with dreams, something that comes from their own thoughts and minds. It is not from God. It is a fantasy, although they label it as from God. Those who would know God’s will must wait quietly before God. Furthermore a fool’s voice is known by its multitude of words, something to which we should all take heed. Those who have most to say about God often know the least. When we speak about God it should be thoughtful and measured and in accord with what has been revealed in His word, His revelation of Himself.

Ecc 5:4-5

‘When you vow a vow to God, do not delay in paying it. For he has no pleasure in fools. Pay what you vowed. It is better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay.’

How easily a promise is made to God. He will not come in person to require it of us. But beware, says The Preacher. When you have made a vow do not delay fulfilling it. It is the fool, the man whose belief and commitment is nominal, who makes rash vows, and in them God has no pleasure. Thus we must fulfil our promises to God promptly. It would have been better if we had not made our dedication, than to make it and then back down on it (see Deu 23:21-23).

So he does not consider this meaningless either. He considers it a serious matter. For a time he has lost his pessimism. He is aware that he is dealing with everlastingness.

Ecc 5:6-7

‘Do not allow your mouth to cause your flesh to sin, nor say before the messenger (or Angel) that it was an error. Why should God be angry at what you say (‘your voice), and destroy the work of your hands. For this is what happens through the multitude of dreams and meaningless promises and many words. But as for you, fear God.’

The Preacher warns us that we must watch our words before God, for if we do not we will commit ourselves in a way that then causes us to sin. And once we have made our vow (unless it was very foolish and not what God would require) we must be careful to perform it. We must not step back and say it was a mistake. We should not have made such a mistake. God is not to be mocked or treated lightly.

For if we are not obedient and honest with regard to our vows, God will be angry, and we will somehow suffer loss. Then he points out that situations like this often arise through too many self-induced dreams, too many meaningless promises, too much talking in prayer and not enough listening.

And at length he comes to his final conclusion. It is important to be in awe of God, to be submissive to His authority in godly fear. Later he will point out that to fear God and keep His covenant requirements is man’s whole responsibility and duty (Ecc 12:13). He is back to his thought that man must trust in God and walk before Him. In all this the Preacher is explicit about the good man’s personal relationship with God.

But who is the messenger (angel) who has been mentioned? In Mal 2:5-7 we are told that it is the true priest, the one who receives God’s word, who is ‘the messenger of YHWH of hosts’, he who truly teaches the Law of Truth. Thus it is a godly priest who may be in the writer’s mind here. Alternately he may be referring to the Angel of YHWH, that mysterious figure Who so often represented God and was God.

It is important to note that there is no question of ‘vanity’ here. Here the ‘vanities’ are on the part of those who do not obey God (Ecc 5:7). For a brief while The Preacher is in his God-aware mood. Many a man, as he searches for the truth about God, has experienced such moments when all seemed to be settled, until the questionings started again.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Vanity of External Religion: Exhortation to Fear God Ecc 5:1-7 describes the man in pursuit of a plan. In one’s busy schedule and haste to accomplish a multitude of tasks there come dreams in the night and rash vows to God. In these vows we want God to bless our own plans, when we, in fact, should wait before the Lord and hear His plans for our daily pursuits.

Illustration – I was considering making a vow one day by promising the Lord I would give my study notes free to everyone if he would bless my labours of working with my father to supply my financial needs. I quickly realized that I might be changing God’s plan for my life. A man can set his own destiny by making a vow and detract from God’s plan for his life. He must learn to enjoy his daily labours by resting in God’s divine providence and intervention.

Ecc 5:1  Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil.

Ecc 5:1 Comments – As a manager of Lighthouse Television in Kampala, Uganda, when a marketing agent enters my office, I want them to come in, sit down and wait for me to lead the conversation. This is the only way that I can organize my daily tasks so that information can be digested and decisions made. When a marketing agent comes into my office at my request and begins to talk as he walks in the door, I ask him to please sit down and let me lead the conversation. I am not trying to be rude, but rather, I am trying to avoid allowing information to enter my office without order and control. For example, I may be on the telephone while someone is knocking at the door. I must have a way to organize the information that comes to me so that proper discussions are held and correct decisions are made. This cannot take place when I allow information to flow at random and with no order. The point is that there is an order in which to approach those in authority, and the order never involves walking in and doing all of the talking. It does involve being ready to sit down and listen.

Ecc 5:2  Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.

Ecc 5:2 “Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God” Comments – We do not always make our vows to God, but we do always make them before God. In other words, any vow we make is heard by God.

Ecc 5:2 “therefore let thy words be few” – Illustrations:

Mat 6:7, “But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.”

Luk 18:11-14, “The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.”

Ecc 5:3  For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool’s voice is known by multitude of words.

Ecc 5:3 “For a dream cometh through the multitude of business” Word Study on “business” Strong says the Hebrew word “business” ( ) (H6045). It means, “ado, employment, an affair,” comes from the root verb ( ) (H6031), which means, “to depress, afflict, or abase oneself.” The Enhanced Strong says it is used 8 times in the Old Testament, being translated in the KJV as, “ travail 6, business 2.”

Comments – It has been my experience that when I busy myself with an activity during the course of the day or the week, I tend to think about it after work and get inspired ideas. This is how God created us. In contrast, a lazy person never has any creative ideas, because he has no goals to reach, no ambition. But for those who are diligent, their time of rest also becomes a time of meditation and inspiration. This is often how God guides us. For example, I once was dealing with an electrical problem with the rear taillights on an old pickup truck that I used as a part of my daily work. I had just painted this truck, which required me to remove and reinstall the truck bed. In doing so, I did not realize that I had pinched some electrical wires that went to the rear taillights. I searched until I found the pinched wires and repaired them, but the problem did not go away. One night I had a dream in which I saw a hand reach under the dashboard of the truck and pull out the fuse box. This and turned the fuse box over to expose the back side and pointed to wires on the lower end of this box. The next morning, I went out to my truck, located this fuse box, looked in the same location that this hand was pointing, and to my complete surprise, I found two wires that has melted together as a result of the wires being pinched in the rear of the vehicle. Thus, my dream was stimulated by my busy efforts to fix this problem.

Comments – A day of busy activities and concerns brings on dreams in the night which seem to have little meaning behind them. Likewise, much talking creates the voice of a fool at the end of the day. His much talking has little effect in its ability to correct the concerns of daily life.

Ecc 5:4  When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed.

Ecc 5:4 Illustration – I will never forget the vow that I made to the Lord one night in church. The Lord had spoken to me while working with Jack Emerson in Panama City to build Him a house. I promised the Lord one night at Word of Faith Church in Dallas about 1992 that if He would give me a precious young virgin wife, filled with the Holy Spirit, that I would build Him “the largest house in the world.” Little did I dream that He would hold me to such a vow. Within 12 weeks of receiving my beautiful wife from the Philippines, He sent me to Africa to work in the largest ministry in the world, which is Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) television stations. This ministry contacts more people with the message of Jesus daily than any other ministry in the history of the Church. So, I have learned that God is faithful. So when someone asks me why I would go to Africa, I do not tell them about my vow, I just tell them that I want to be faithful to serve the Lord, but inside I know what the Lord is doing and why He sent me here.

Ecc 5:5  Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.

Ecc 5:6  Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?

Ecc 5:6 “Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin” Scripture Reference – Note:

Jas 1:26, “If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain.”

Ecc 5:6 “neither say thou before the angel” Comments – We can interpret the phrase “neither say thou before the angel” by the previous verses that tell us not to enter the house of God and utter a vow hastily. Thus, the phrase “before the angel” can be equated to “in the house of God.” We know from testimonies of those believers who have seen in the spirit realm that God assigns His angels to watch over each church and sanctuary. Thus, when we make a vow in the sanctuary, we are actually speaking “before the angel” that has been assigned there.

Ecc 5:6 “that it (was) an error” Comments – We are not to make excuses later and try to back out of our vows (Pro 20:25).

Pro 20:25, “It is a snare to the man who devoureth that which is holy, and after vows to make enquiry .”

Ecc 5:7  For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.

Ecc 5:7 “For in the multitude of dreams” – Comments – The word “dream” in Ecc 5:7 seems to carry the idea of thoughts of vain pursuits. It reflects someone who is always coming up with vain ideas of what they intend to do. Note:

Rotherham, “For it was done amidst a multitude of dreams, and vanities, and many words, but, towards God, be thou reverent.”

BBE, “Because much talk comes from dreams and things of no purpose. But let the fear of God be in you.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

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

Proper Worship of God

v. 1. Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, carefully watching lest it stray aside from the path leading to the Lord’s Temple and such a person’s heart be affected with thoughts which interfere with true devotion, and be more ready to hear, rather, “approach to hear,” to listen to and to heed the Word of God, than to give the sacrifice of fools, as is done in thoughtless and hypocritical worship; for they consider not that they do evil, they do not realize how deeply they offend the Lord with their irreverent behavior.

v. 2. Be not rash with thy mouth, quick to speak, especially in thoughtless prayer, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter anything before God, since prayer demands an attitude of true devotion; for God is in heaven, exalted above all levity and thoughtless form of worship, and thou upon earth, immeasurably beneath the majesty of the almighty Sovereign of the earth; therefore let thy words be few, not indulging in heathenish babbling, Mat 6:7.

v. 3. For a dream cometh through the multitude of business, when a person is engrossed with the cares and anxieties of his work, his dreams are apt to mislead him into a land of make believe; and a fool’s voice is known by multitude of words, he believes the efficacy of prayer depends upon the amount of language expended, whereas it depends upon the sincerity of the mind resting upon the true devotion of faith.

v. 4. When thou vowest a vow unto God, such vows among the Jews being included in the precepts of their religion, Num 30:2; Deu 23:21-23, defer not to pay it, this admonition being directed against hasty and ill-considered vows; for He hath no pleasure in fools, God wants no vows to be made in a spirit of levity, without regarding their sanctity; pay that which thou hast vowed, Psa 66:13-14.

v. 5. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, Deu 23:22, not make rash promises supported by an obligation before the Lord, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay, provided the vow is in agreement with the great precepts of God’s Word, especially the command of love.

v. 6. Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin, for the sensual nature of man is stimulated by the sins of the tongue; neither may thou before the angel, before the priest, as the representative of the Lord, that it was an error, the object being to escape the consequences of an unfulfilled vow; wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, which has thus become guilty of lying, and destroy the work of thine hands? The punishment of God, in a case of this kind, is shown not only in the failure of undertakings, but also in the overthrowing of projects already established.

v. 7. For in the multitude of dreams, foolish fancies concerning God’s requirements of men in worship, and many words, hasty and ill-considered, there are also divers vanities, they are unreliable and do not fit a person for the duties which the Word of God lays upon him; but fear thou God, for the fear of God, as the basis of all true wisdom, will guide the steps of man aright on the way of true sanctification.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

Ecc 5:1-7

Section 6. Man’s outward and secular life being unable to secure happiness and satisfaction, can these be found in popular religion? Religious exercises need the observation of strict rules, which are far from meeting with general attention. Koheleth proceeds to give instruction, in the form of maxims, concerning public worship, prayer, and vows.

Ecc 5:1

This verse, in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin Bibles, forms the conclusion of Ecc 4:1-16; and is taken independently; but the division in our version is more natural, and the connection of this with the following verses is obvious. Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, Some read “feet” instead of “foot,” but the singular and plural numbers are both found in this signification (comp. Psa 119:59, Psa 119:105; Pro 1:15; Pro 4:26, Pro 4:27). To “keep the foot” is to be careful of the conduct, to remember what you are about, whither you are going. There is no allusion to the sacerdotal rite of washing the feet before entering the holy place (Exo 30:18, Exo 30:19), nor to the custom of removing the shoes on entering a consecrated building, which was a symbol of reverential awe and obedient service. The expression is simply a term connected with man’s ordinary life transferred to his moral and religious life. The house of God is the temple. The tabernacle is called “the house of Jehovah” (1Sa 1:7; 2Sa 12:20), and this name is commonly applied to the temple; e.g. 1Ki 3:1; 2Ch 8:16; Ezr 3:11. But “house of God” is applied also to the temple (2Ch 5:14; Ezr 5:8, Ezr 5:15, etc.), so that we need not, with Bullock, suppose that Koheleth avoids the name of the Lord of the covenant as “a natural sign of the writer’s humiliation after his fall into idolatry, and an acknowledgment of his unworthiness of the privileges of a son of the covenant.” It is probable that the expression here is meant to include synagogues as well as the great temple at Jerusalem, since the following clause seems to imply that exhortation would be heard there, which formed no part of the temple service. The verse has furnished a text on the subject of the reverence due to God’s house and service from Chrysostom downwards. And be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools. Various are the renderings of this clause. Wright, “For to draw near to hear is (better) than the fools offering sacrifices.” (So virtually Knobel, Ewald, etc.) Ginsburg, “For it is nearer to obey than to offer the sacrifice of the disobedient;” i.e. it is the straighter, truer way to take when you obey God than when you merely perform outward service. The Vulgate takes the infinitive verb as equivalent to the imperative, as the Authorized Version, Appropinqua ut audias; but it is best to regard it as pure infinitive, and to translate, “To approach in order to hear is better than to offer the sacrifice of fools.” The sentiment is the same as that in 1Sa 15:22, ‘Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.” The same thought occurs in Pro 21:3; Psa 50:7-15; and continually in the prophets; e.g. Isa 1:11; Jer 7:21-23; Hos 6:6, etc. It is the reaction against the mere ceremonialism which marked the popular religion. Koheleth had seen and deplored this at Jerusalem and elsewhere, and he enunciates the great troth that it is more acceptable to God that one should go to his house to hear the Law read and taught and expounded, than to offer a formal sacrifice, which, as being the offering of a godless man is called in proverbial language “the sacrifice of fools” (Pro 21:27). The verb used here, “give” (nathan), is not the usual expression for offering sacrifice, and may possibly refer to the feast which accompanied such sacrifices, and which often degenerated into excess (Delitzsch). That the verb rendered “to hear” does not mean merely “to obey” is plain from its reference to conduct in the house of God. The reading of the Law, and probably of the prophets, formed a feature of the temple service in Koheleth’s day; the expounding of the same in public was confined to the synagogues, which seem to have originated in the time of the exile, though there were doubtless before that time some regular occasions of assembling together (see 2Ki 4:23). For they consider not that they do evil; ; Qui nesciunt quid faciunt mali (Vulgate); “They are without knowledge, so that they do evil” (Delitzsch, Knobel, etc.); “As they (who obey) know not to do evil” (Ginsburg). The words can scarcely mean, “They know not that they do evil;” nor, as Hitzig has, “They know not how to be sorrowful.” There is much difficulty in understanding the passage according to the received reading, and Nowack, with others, deems the text corrupt. If we accept what we now find, it is best to translate, “They know not, so that they do evil;” i.e. their ignorance predisposes them to err in this matter. The persons meant are the “fools” who offer unacceptable sacrifices. These know not how to worship God heartily and properly, and, thinking to please him with their formal acts of devotion, fall into a grievous sin.

Ecc 5:2

Koheleth warns against thoughtless words or hasty professions in prayer, which formed another feature of popular religion. Be not rash with thy mouth. The warning is against hasty and thoughtless words in prayer, words that go from the lips with glib facility, but come not from the heart. Thus our Lord bids those who pray not to use vain repetitions ( ), as the heathen, who think to be heard for their much speaking (Mat 6:7). Jesus himself used the same words in his prayer in the garden, and he continually urges the lesson of much and constant prayera lessen enforced by apostolic admonitions (see Luk 11:5, etc.; Php 4:6; 1Th 5:17); but it is quite possible to use the same words, and yet throw the whole heart into them each time that they are repeated. Whether the repetition is vain or not depends upon the spirit of the person who prays. Let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God. We should weigh well our wishes, arrange them discreetly, ponder whether they are such as we can rightly make subjects of petition, ere we lay them in words before the Lord. “Before God” may mean in the temple, the house of God, where he is specially present, as Solomon himself testified (1Ki 8:27, 1Ki 8:30, 1Ki 8:43). God is in heaven. The infinite distance between God and man, illustrated by the contrast of earth and the illimitable heaven, is the ground of the admonition to reverence and thoughtfulness (comp. Psa 115:3, Psa 115:16; Isa 4:1-6 :8, 9; Isa 66:1). Therefore let thy words be few, as becomes one who speaks in the awful presence of God. Ben-Sira seems to have had this passage in mind when he writes (Ecclesiasticus 7:14), “Prate not in a multitude of elders, and repeat not ( ) the word in prayer.” We may remember the conduct of the priests of Baal (1Ki 18:26). Ginsburg and Wright quote the Talmudic precept (‘Beraehoth,’ 68. a), “Let the words of a man always be few in the presence of God, according as it is written,” and then follows the passage in our text.

Ecc 5:3

The first clause illustrates the second, the mark of comparison being simply the copula, mere juxtaposition being deemed sufficient to denote the similitude, as in Ecc 7:1; Pro 17:3; Pro 27:21. For a dream cometh through (in consequence of) the multitude of business. The verse is meant to confirm the injunction against vain babbling in prayer. Cares and anxieties in business or other matters occasion disturbed sleep, murder the dreamless repose of the healthy laborer, and produce all kinds of sick fancies and imaginations. Septuagint, “A dream cometh in abundance of trial ();” Vulgate, Multas curas sequuntur somnia. And a fool’s voice is known by multitude of words. The verb should be supplied from the first clause, and not a new one introduced, as in the Authorized Version, “And the voice of a fool (cometh) in consequence of many words.” As surely as excess of business produces fevered dreams, so excess of words, especially in addresses to God, produces a fool’s voice, i.e. foolish speech. St. Gregory points out the many ways in which the mind is affected by images from dreams. “Sometimes,” he says, “dreams are engendered of fullness or emptiness of the belly, sometimes of illusion, sometimes of illusion and thought combined, sometimes of revelation, while sometimes they are engendered of imagination, thought, and revelation together” (‘Moral.,’ 8.42).

Ecc 5:4

Koheleth passes on to give a warning concerning the making of vows, which formed a great feature in Hebrew religion, and was the occasion of much irreverence and profanity. When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it. There is here plainly a reminiscence of Deu 23:21-23. Vows are not regarded as absolute duties which every one was obliged to undertake. They are of a voluntary nature, but when made are to be strictly performed. They might consist of a promise to dedicate certain things or persons to God (see Gen 38:20; Jdg 11:30), or to abstain from doing certain things, as in the case of the Nazarites. The rabbinical injunction quoted by our Lord in the sermon on the mount (Mat 5:33), “Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths,” was probably levelled against profane swearing, or invoking God’s Name lightly, but it may include the duty of performing vows made to or in the Name of God. Our Lord does not condemn the practice of corban, while noticing with rebuke a perversion of the custom (Mar 7:11). For he hath no pleasure in fools. The non-fulfillment of a vow would prove a man to be impious, in proverbial language “a fool,” and as such God must regard him with displeasure. The clause in the Hebrew is somewhat ambiguous, being literally, There is no pleasure (chephets) in fools; i.e. no one, neither God nor man, would take pleasure in fools who make promises and never perform them. Or it may be, There is no fixed will in fools; i.e. they waver and are undecided in purpose. But this rendering of chephets appears to be very doubtful. Septuagint which reproduces the vagueness of the Hebrew; Vulgate, Displicet enim ei (Deo) infidelis et stulta promissio. The meaning is well represented in the Authorized Version, and we must complete the sense by supplying in thought “on the part of God.” Pay that which thou but vowed. Ben-Sira re-echoes the injunction (Ecclesiasticus 18:22, 23), “Let nothing hinder thee to pay thy vow () in due time, and defer not until death to be justified [i.e. to fulfill the vow]. Before making a vow () prepare thyself; and be not as one that tempteth the Lord.” The verse is cited in the Talmud; and Dukes gives a parallel, “Before thou vowest anything, consider the object of thy vow”. So in Pro 20:25 we have, according to some translations, “It is a snare to a man rashly to say, It is holy, and after vows to make inquiry.” Septuagint,” Pay thou therefore whatsoever thou shalt have vowed ( ),

Ecc 5:5

Better is it that thou shouldest not vow. There is no harm in not vowing (Deu 23:22); but a vow once made becomes of the nature of an oath, and its non-performance is a sin and sacrilege, and incurs the punishment of false swearing. We gather from the Talmud that frivolous excuses for the evasion of vows were very common, and called for stern repression, One sees this in our Lord’s references (Mat 5:33-37; Mat 23:16-22). St. Paul severely reprehends those women who break their vow of widowhood, “having condemnation, because they have rejected their first faith” (1Ti 5:12).

Ecc 5:6

Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin. “Thy flesh” is equivalent to “thyself,” the whole personality, the idea of the flesh, as a distinct part of the man, sinning, being alien from Old Testament ontology. The injunction meansDo not, by uttering rash or inconsiderate vows, which you afterwards evade or cannot fulfill, bring sin upon yourself, or, as others render, bring punishment upon yourself. Septuagint, “Suffer not thy mouth to Cause thy flesh to sin ( );” Vulgate, Ut peccare facias carnem tuam. Another interpretation, but not so suitable, is thisDo not let thy mouth (i.e. thy appetite) lead thee to break the vow of abstinence, and indulge in meat or drink from which (as, e.g; a Nazarite) thou wast bound to abstain. Neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error. If we take “angel” (malak) in the usual sense (and there seems no very forcible reason why we should not), it must mean the angel of God in whose special charge you are placed, or the angel who was supposed to preside over the altar of worship, or that messenger of God whose duty it is to watch man’s doings and to act as the minister of punishment (2Sa 24:16). The workings of God’s providence are often attributed to angels; and sometimes the names of God and angel are interchanged (see Gen 16:9, Gen 16:13; Gen 18:2, Gen 18:3, etc.; Exo 3:2, Exo 3:4; Exo 23:20, etc.). Thus the Septuagint here renders, “Say not before the face of God ( = ).” If this interpretation be allowed, we have an argument for the literal explanation of the much-disputed passage in 1Co 11:10, . Thus, too, in ‘The Testaments of the XII. Patriarchs,’ we have, “The Lord is witness, and his angels are witnesses, concerning the word of your mouth” (‘Levi,’ 19). But most commentators consider that the word here means “messenger” of Jehovah, in the sense of priest, the announcer of the Divine Law, as in the unique passage Mal 2:7. Traces of a similar use of may be found in the New Testament (Rev 1:20; Rev 2:1, etc.). According to the first interpretation, the man comes before God with his excuse; according to the second, he comes to the priest, and confesses that he was thoughtless and overhasty in making his vow, and desires to be released from it, or, at any rate, by some means to evade its fulfillment. His excuse may possibly look to the eases mentioned in Num 15:22, etc; and he may wish to urge that the vow was made in ignorance, and that therefore he was not responsible for its incomplete execution. We do not know that a priest or any officer of the temple had authority to release from the obligation of a vow, so that the excuse made “before” him would seem to be objectless, while the evasion of a solemn promise made in the Name of God might well be said to be done in the presence of the observing and recording angel. The Vulgate rendering, Non eat providentia, makes the man account for his neglect by assuming that God takes no heed of such things; he deems the long-suffering of God to be indifference and disregard (comp. Ecc 8:11; Ecc 9:3). The original does not bear this interpretation. Wherefore should God be angry at thy voicethe words in which thy evasion and dishonesty are expressedand destroy the work of thine hands? i.e. punish thee by calamity, want of success, sickness, etc; God’s moral government being vindicated by earthly visitations.

Ecc 5:7

For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities. The Hebrew is literally, For in multitude of dreams, and vanities, and many words; i.e; as Wright puts it, “In the multitude of dreams are also vanities, and (in) many words (as well).” Koheleth sums up the sense of the preceding paragraph, Ecc 5:1-6. The popular religion, which made much of dreams and verbosity and vows, is vanity, and has in it nothing substantial or comforting. The superstitious man who puts his faith in dreams is unpractical and unreal; the garrulous man who is rash in his vows, and in prayer thinks to be heard for his much speaking, displeases God and never secures his object. Ginsburg and Bullock render, “For it is (it happens) through the multitude of idle thoughts and vanities and much talking,” the reference being either to the foolish speaking of Ecc 5:2 or to the wrath of God in Ecc 5:6. The Septuagint rendering is elliptical, . To complete this, some supply, “Many vows are made or excused;” others, “There is evil.” Vulgate, Ubi multa aunt somnia, plurimae aunt vanitates, et sermones innumeri.’ The Authorized Version gives the sense of the passage. But fear thou God. In contrast with these spurious forms of religion, which the Jews were inclined to adopt, the writer recalls men to the fear of the one true God, to whom all vows should be performed, and who should be worshipped from the heart.

Ecc 5:8-17

Section 7. Perils to which one is exposed in a despotic state, and the unprofitableness of riches.

Ecc 5:8, Ecc 5:9

In political life there is little that is satisfactory; yet one must not surrender one’s belief in a superintending Providence.

Ecc 5:8

If thou seest the oppression of the poor. From errors in the service of God, it is natural to turn to faults in the administration of the king (Pro 24:21). Koheleth has already alluded to these anomalies in Ecc 3:16 and Ecc 4:1. Violent perverting; literally, robbery; so that judgment is never rightly given, and justice is withheld from applicants. In a province (me dinah, Ecc 2:8); the district in which the person addressed dwells. It may, perhaps, to implied that {his is remote from the central authority, and therefore more liable to be injuriously dealt with by unscrupulous rulers. Marvel not at the matter (chephets, Ecc 3:1). Be not surprised or dismayed (Job 26:11) at such evil doings,, as though they were unheard of, or inexperienced, or disregarded. There is here nothing of the Greek maxim, reproduced by Horace in his “Nil admirari” (‘Epist.,’ 1.6. 1). It is like St. John’s “Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you” (1Jn 3:13); or St. Peter’s “Think it not strange concerning the fiery trial among’ you” (1Pe 4:12). The stupid and unintelligent observation of such disorders might lead to arraignment of Providence and distrust in the moral government of God. Against such mistakes the writer guards. For he that is higher than the highest regardeth. Both the words are in the singular number. Septuagint, . One thinks of the Persian satraps, who acted much as the Turkish pashas in later times, the petty rulers oppressing the people, and being themselves treated in the same fashion by their superiors. The whole is a system of wrong-doing, where the weaker always suffers, and the only comfort is that the oppressor himself is subject to higher supervision. The verb (shamar) translated “regardeth” means to observe in a hostile sense, to watch for occasions of reprisal, as 1Sa 19:11; and the idea intended is that in the province there were endless plottings and counterplottings, mutual denunciations and recriminations; that such things were only to be expected, and were no sufficient cause for infidelity or despair. “The higher one” is the monarch, the despotic king who holds the supreme power over all these maladministrators and perverters of justice. And there be higher than they. “Higher” is here plural (gebohim), the plural of majesty, as it is called (comp. Ecc 12:1), like Elohim, the word for “God,” the assonance being probably here suggestive. Over the highest of earthly rulers there are other powers, angels, principalities, up to God himself, who governs the course of this world, and to whom we may leave the final adjustment. Who are meant seems purposely to be left undetermined; but the thought of the righteous Judge of all is intimated in accordance with the view of Ecc 3:17. This is a far more satisfactory explanation of the passage than that which regards as the highest of all “the court favorites, king’s friends, eunuchs, chamberlains,” etc. In this view Koheleth is merely asserting the general system of injustice and oppression, and neither accounting for it nor offering any comfort under the circumstances. But his object throughout is to show man’s inability to secure his own happiness, and the need of submission to Divine providence. To demonstrate the anomalies in the events of the world, the circumstances of men’s lives would be only one part of his task, which would not be completed without turning attention to the remedy against hasty and unfair conclusions. This remedy is the thought of the supreme Disposer of events, who holds all the strings in his hand, and will in the end bring good out of evil.

Ecc 5:9

It has been much debated whether this verse should be connected with the preceding or the following paragraph. The Vulgate takes it with the preceding verse, Et insuper universae terrae rex imperat servienti; so the Septuagint; and this seems most natural, avarice, wealth, and its evils in private life being treated of in Ecc 5:10 and many following. Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the king himself is served by the field. The writer seems to be contrasting the misery of Oriental despotism, above spoken of, with the happiness of a country whose king was content to enrich himself, not by war, rapine, and oppression, but by the peaceful pursuits of agriculture, by cherishing the natural productions of his country, and encouraging his people in developing its resources. Such was Uzziah, who” loved husbandry” (2Ch 26:10); and in Solomon’s own time the arts of peace greatly flourished. There is much difficulty in interpreting the verse. The Vulgate rendering, “And moreover the King of the whole earth rules over his servant,” probably means that God governs the king. But the present Hebrew text does not support this translation. The Septuagint has, , which makes more difficulties. “Also the abundance of the earth is for every one, or upon every thing; the king (is dependent on) the cultivated land, or, there is a king to the land when cultivated,” i.e. the throne itself depends on the due cultivation of the country. Or, removing the comma, “The profit of the land in everything is a king of the cultivated field.” The Hebrew may safely be rendered, “But the profit of a land in all things is a king devoted to the field,” i.e. who loves and fosters agriculture. It is difficult to suppose that Solomon himself wrote this sentence, however we may interpret it. According to the Authorized Version, the idea is that the profit of the soil extends to every rank of life; even the king, who seems superior to all, is dependent upon the industry of the people, and the favorable produce of the land. He could not be unjust and oppressive without injuring his revenues in the end. Ben-Sira sings the praises of agriculture: “Hate not laborious work, neither husbandry; which the Most High hath ordained” (Ecclesiasticus 7:15). Agriculture held a very prominent position in the Mosaic commonwealth. The enactments concerning the firstfruits, the sabbatical year, landmarks, the non-alienation of inheritances, etc; tended to give peculiar importance to cultivation of the soil. Cicero’s praise of agriculture is often quoted. Thus (‘De Senect.,’ 15. sqq.; ‘De Off.,’ 1:42): “Omninm return, ex quibus aliquid acquiritur, nihil est agricultura melius, nihil uberius, nihil dulcius, nihil heroine libero dignius.”

Ecc 5:10-17

The thought of the acts of injustice and oppression noticed above, all of which spring from the craving for money, leads the bard to dwell upon the evils that accompany this pursuit and possession of wealth, which is thus seen to give no real satisfaction. Avarice has already been noticed (Ecc 4:7-12); the covetous man now reprobated is one who desires wealth only for the enjoyment he can get from it, or the display which it enables him to make, not, like the miser, who gloats over its mere possession. Various instances are given in which riches are unprofitable and vain.

Ecc 5:10

He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver. “Silver,” the generic name for money, as Greek and French argent. The insatiableness of the passion for money is a common theme of poets, moralists, and satirists, and is found in the proverbs of all nations. Thus Horace (‘Ep.,’ Eph 1:2. 56): “Semper avarus eget;” to which St Jerome alludes (‘Epist.,’ 53), “Antiquum dictum est, Avaro tam deest, quod habet, quam quod non habet.” Comp. Juvenal, ‘Sat.,’ 14.139

“Interea pleno quum forget sacculus ere,
Crescit amor nummi, quantum ipsa pecnnia crevit.”

“For as thy strutting bags with money rise,
The love of gain is of an equal size.”

(Dryden.)

There is much more of similar import in Horace. See ‘Carm.,’ 2.2. 13, sqq.; 3.16. 17, 28; ‘Ep.,’ 2.2, 147; an, 1 Ovid, Fast.,’ 1.211

“Creverunt etopes et opum furiosa cupido,
Et, quum possideant plura, plura volunt.”

“As wealth increases grows the frenzied thirst
For wealth; the more they have, the more they want.”

Nor he that loveth abundance with increase. The Authorized Version scarcely presents the sense of the passage, which is not tautological, but rather that given by the Vulgate, Et qui amat divitias fructum non capiet exeis, “He who loveth abundance of wealth hath no fruit therefrom;” he derives no real profit or enjoyment from the luxury which it enables him to procure; rather it brings added trouble. And so the old conclusion is again reached, this is also vanity. Hitzig takes the sentence as interrogative, “Who hath pleasure in abundance which brings nothing in?” But such questions are hardly in the style of Kohelcth, and the notion of capital without interest is not a thought which would have been then understood. The Septuagint, however, reads the clause interrogatively, (, al.) ; “And who has loved [or, has been content with] gain in its fullness?” But is not necessarily interrogative, but here indefinite, equivalent to “whosoever.”

Ecc 5:11

Koheleth proceeds to notice some of the inconveniences which accompany wealth, which go far to prove that God is over all. When goods increase, they are increased that eat them. The more riches a man possesses, the greater are the claims upon him. He increases his household, retainers, and dependents, and is really none the better off for all his wealth. So Job in his prosperous days is said to have had “a very great household” (Job 1:3), and the servants and laborers employed by Solomon must have taxed to the utmost even his abnormal resources (1Ki 5:13, etc.). Commentators from Piueda downwards have quoted the remarkable parallel in Xenoph; ‘Cyropaed.,’ Job 8:3, wherein the wealthy Persian Pheraulas, who had risen from poverty to high estate, disabuses a young Sacian friend of the idea that his riches made him happier or afforded supreme content. “Do you not know,” said he,” that I neither eat, nor drink, nor sleep with any more pleasure now than I did when I was poor? by having this abundance I gain merely this, that I have to guard more, to distribute more among others, and to have the trouble of taking care of more. For now numerous domestics demand of me food, drink, clothes; some want the doctor; one comes and brings me sheep that have been torn by wolves, or oxen killed by failing down a precipice, or tells of a murrain that has affected the cattle; so that I seem to myself to have more afflictions in my abundance than I had when I was poor, It is obligatory on him who possesses much to expend much both on the gods and on friends and on strangers; and whosoever is greatly pleased with the possession of riches will, you may be assured, be greatly annoyed at the expenditure of them.” What good is there to the owners thereof, saving the beholding of them with their eyes? What it is that the owners behold is doubtful. Ginsburg considers that the increased number of devourers is meant; but surely this sight could hardly be called kishron, “success, profit.” So it is better to take the sight to be the amassed wealth. The contemplation of this is the only enjoyment that the possessor realizes. So the Vulgate, Et quid prodest possessori, nisi quod cernit divitias oculis suis? Septuagint, ,” And in what does the excellence of the owner consist? except the power of seeing it with his eyes.” A Lapide quotes Horace’s portrait of the miser (‘Sat.,’ 1.1.66, sqq.)

“Populus me sibilat; ut mihi plaudo

Ipse domi, simul ac, nummos contemplor in area

… congestis undique saccis

Indormis inhians et tanquam parcere sacris
Cogeris aut pictis tanquam gaudere tabellis.”

“He, when the people hissed, would turn about,
And dryly thus accost the rabble-rout:
‘Hiss on; heed you not, ye saucy wags,
While self-applauses greet me o’er my bags. ‘
O’er countless heaps in nicest order stored,
You pore agape, and gaze upon the hoard,
As relics to be laid with reverence by,
Or pictures only meant to please the eye.”

(Howes.)

Ecc 5:12

Another inconvenience of great wealthit robs a man of his sleep. The sleep of a laboring man is sweet, whether he eat little or much. The laborer is the husbandman, the tiller of the ground (Gen 4:2). The Septuagint, with a different pointing, renders , “slave,” which is less appropriate, the fact being generally true of free or bond man. Whether his fare be plentiful or scanty, the honest laborer earns and enjoys his night’s rest. But the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep. The allusion is not to the overloading of the stomach, which might occasion sleeplessness in the case of the poor equally with the rich man, but to the cares and anxieties which wealth brings. “Not a soft couch, nor a bedstead overlaid with silver, nor the quietness that exists throughout the house, nor any other circumstance of this nature, are so generally wont to make sleep sweet and pleasant, as that of laboring, and growing weary, and lying down with a disposition to sleep, and very greatly needing it . Not so the rich. On the contrary, whilst lying on their beds, they are frequently without sleep through the whole night; and, though they devise many schemes, they do not obtain such pleasure” (St. Chrysostom, ‘Hom. on Stat.,’ 22). The contrast between the grateful sleep of the tired worker and the disturbed rest of the avaricious and moneyed and luxurious has formed a fruitful theme for poets. Thus Horace, ‘Carm.,’ 3.1.21

“Somnus agrestium

Lenis virorum non humiles domes
Fastidit umbrosamque ripam,

Non Zephyris agitata Tempe.”

“Yet sleep turns never from the lowly shed
Of humbler-minded men, nor from the eaves
In Tempe’s graceful vale is banished,
Where only Zephyrs stir the murmuring leaves.”

(Stanley.)

And the reverse, ‘Sat.,’ 1.1.76, sqq.

“An vigilare metu exanimem, noctesque diesque
Formidare males fures, inccndia, serves,
Ne to compilent fugientes, hoc juvat?”

“But what are your indulgencies? All day,
All night, to watch and shudder with dismay,
Lest ruffians fire your house, or slaves by stealth
Rifle your coffers, and abstract your wealth?
If this be affluencethis her boasted fruit,
Of all such joys may I live destitute.”

(Howes.)

Comp. Juvenal, ‘Sat.,’ 10.12, sqq.; 14.304. Shakespeare, ‘Henry IV.,’ Pt. II; act 3. sc. 1

“Why rather, sleep, liest thou in smoky cribs,
Upon uneasy pallets stretching thee,
And hush’d with buzzing night-flies to thy slumber,
Than in the perfumed chambers of the great,
Under the canopies of costly state,
And lulled with sounds of sweetest melody?”

Ecc 5:13-17

Another view of the evils attendant upon riches is here presented: the owner may lose them at a stroke, and leave nothing for his children. This thought is presented in different lights.

Ecc 5:13

There is also a sore evil which I have seen under the sun (so Ecc 5:16). The fact that follows is, of course, not universally true, but occasionally seen, and is a very bitter evil. The Septuagint calls it ; the Vulgate, infirmitas. Riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt; rather, preserved by the possessor, hoarded and guarded, only to bring their lord added grief when by some reverse of fortune he loses them, as explained in what follows.

Ecc 5:14

Those riches perish by evil travail; thing or circumstance. There is no need to confine the cause of the loss to unsuccessful business, as many commentators do. The rich man does not seem to be a tradesman or speculator; he loses his property, like Job, by visitations for which he is in no way answerableby storm or tempest, by robbers, by fire, by exactions, or by lawsuits. And he begetteth a son, and there is nothing in his hand. The verb rendered “begetteth” is in the past tense, and used as it were, hypothetically, equivalent to “hath he begotten a son,” supposing he has a son. His misery is doubled by the reflection that he has lost all hope of securing a fortune for his children, or founding a family, or passing on an inheritance to posterity. It is doubtful to whom the pronoun “his” refers. Many consider that the father is meant, and the clause says that when he has begotten a son, he finds he has nothing to give him. But the suffix seems most naturally to refer to the son, who is thus left a pauper. Vulgate, Generavit filium qui in summa egestate erit. Having a thing in the hand moans having power over it, or possessing it.

Ecc 5:15

The case of the rich man who has lost his property is here generalized. What is true of him is, in a measure, true of every one, so far as he can carry nothing away with him when he dies (Psa 49:17). As he came forth of his mother’s womb, naked shall he return to go as he came. There is a plain reference to Job 1:21, “Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither.” The mother is the earth, human beings being regarded as her offspring. So the psalmist says, “My frame was curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth” (Psa 139:15). And Ben-Sira, “Great trouble is created for every man, and a heavy yoke is upon the sons of Adam, from the day that they go out of their mother’s womb till the day that they return to the mother of all things.” 1Ti 6:7, “We brought nothing into the world, neither can we carry anything out.” Thus Propertius, ‘Eleg.,’ 3.5. 13

“Hand ullas portabis opes Acherontis ad undas,
Nudus ab inferna, stulte, vehere rate.”

“No wealth thou’lt take to Acheron’s dark shore,
Naked, th’ infernal bark will bear thee o’er.”

Shall take nothing of his labor; rather, for his labor, the preposition being of price. He gets nothing by his long toil in amassing wealth. Which he may carry away in his hand, as his own possession. The ruined Dives points a moral for all men.

Ecc 5:16

This also is a sore evil. The thought of Ecc 5:15 is emphatically repeated. In all points as he came; i.e. naked, helpless. And what profit hath he that laboreth for the wind? The answer is emphatically “nothing.” We have had similar questions in Ecc 1:3; Ecc 2:22; Ecc 3:9. To labor for the wind is to toil with no result, like the “feeding on wind, pursuing of vanity,” which is the key-note of the book. The wind is the type of all that is empty, delusive, unsubstantial. In Pro 11:29 we have the phrase, “to inherit the wind.” Job calls futile arguments “words of wind” (Job 16:3; Job 15:2). Thus the Greek proverb to try to catch the wind:” and the Latin, “Ventos pascere,” and “Ventos colere “(see Erasmus, ‘Adag.,’ s.v. “Inanis opera”). Septuagint, ; “And what is his gain for which he labors for the wind?”

Ecc 5:17

The misery that accompanies the rich man’s whole life is summed up here, where one has to think chiefly of his distress after his loss of fortune. All his days also he eateth in darkness; i.e. passes his life in gloom and cheerlessness. , “all his days,” is the accusative of time, not the object of the verb. To eat in darkness is not a common metaphor for spending a gloomy life, but it is a very natural one, and has analogies in this book (e.g. Ecc 2:24; Ecc 3:13, etc.), and in such phrases as to “sit in darkness” (Mic 7:8), and to “walk in darkness” (Isa 1:10). The Septuagint, reading differently, translates, , “Yea, and all his days are in darkness and in mourning.” But the other versions reject this alteration, and few modern commentators adopt it. And he hath much sorrow and wrath with his sickness; literally, and much vexation, and sickness, and wrath; Revised Version, he is sore vexed, and hath sickness and wrath. Delitzsch takes the last words as an exclamation, “And oh for his sorrow and hatred!” The man experiences all kinds of vexation when his plans fail or involve him in trouble and privation; or he is morbid and diseased in mind and body; or he is angry and envious when others succeed better than himself. The sentiment is expressed by St. Paul (1Ti 6:9), “They that desire () to be rich fall into a temptation and a snare, and many foolish and hurtful lusts, such as drown men ( ) in destruction and perdition.” “For,” he proceeds, “the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, which some reaching after have been led astray from the faith, and have pierced themselves through ( ) with many sorrows.” The Septuagint continues its version, “And in much passion () and in infirmity and wrath.” The anger may be directed against himself, as he thinks of his folly in taking all this trouble for nothing.

Ecc 5:18-20

Section 8. The inconveniences of wealth lead the writer back to his old conclusion, that man should make the best of life, and enjoy all the good that God gives with moderation and contentment.

Ecc 5:18

Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely, etc. The accentuation is against this rendering, which, however, has the support of the Syriac and the Targum. The Septuagint gives, , “Behold, I have seen a good which is comely;” and it is best to translate, with Delitzsch and others, “Behold, what I have seen as good, what as beautiful, is this.” My conclusion holds good. They who seek for traces of Greek influence in Koheleth find Epicureanism in the sentiment, and the familiar combination, , in the language. Both ideas are baseless. (For supposed Epicureanism, see on Ecc 2:24 and Ecc 3:12.) And the juxtaposition of and is only a fortuitous rendering of the Hebrew, upon which no argument for Grecism can be founded. To eat and to drink, etc.; i.e. to use the common blessings which God bestows with thankfulness and contentment. As St. Paul says, “Having food and covering, we shall he therewith content” (1Ti 6:8). Which God giveth him. This is the point so often insisted upon. These temporal blessings are God’s gifts, and are not to be considered as the natural and assured result of man’s own exertions. Man, indeed, must labor, but God giveth the increase. For it is his portion (Ecc 3:22). This calm enjoyment is allotted to man by God, and nothing more must be expected. Ben-Sira gives similar advice, “Defraud not thyself of a good day, and let not the share in a right pleasure pass by thee Give, and take, and beguile thy soul; for there is no seeking of dainties in Hades” (Ecclesiasticus 14:14. etc.).

Ecc 5:19

Every man also. The sentence is anacoluthic, like Ecc 3:13, and may best be rendered, Also for every man to whom this is a gift of God. Ginsburg connects the verse closely with the preceding one, supplying, “I have also seen that a man,” etc. Whichever way we take the sentence, it comes to the same tiling, implying man’s absolute dependence upon God’s bounty. To whom God hath given riches and wealth. Before he can enjoy his possessions a man must first receive them from God’s hands. The two terms here used are not quite synonymous. While the former word, osher; is used for wealth of any kind whatever, the latter, nekasim, means properly “wealth in cattle,” like the Latin pecunia, and thence used generally for riches (volek). Hath given him power to eat thereof. Abundance is useless without the power to enjoy it. This is the gift of God, a great and special bounty from a loving and gracious God. Thus Horace, ‘Epist.,’ 1.4. 7

“Di tibi divitias dederunt artemque fruendi.”

“The gods have given you wealth, and (what is more)
Have given you wisdom to enjoy your store.”

(Howes.)

Ecc 5:20

For he shall not much remember the days of his life. The man who has learned the lesson of calm enjoyment does not much concern himself with the shortness, uncertainty, or possible trouble of life. He carries out the counsel of Christ, “Be not anxious for the morrow, for the morrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof” (Mat 6:34). Ginsburg gives an entirely opposite rendering to the clause, “He should remember that the days of his life are not many;” i.e. the thought of the shortness of life should urge us to enjoy it while it lasts. But the Authorized Version is supported by the Septuagint and Vulgate and most modern commentators, and seems most appropriate to the context. The marginal rendering, “Though he give not much, yet he remembereth,” etc; which Ginsburg calls a literary curiosity, must have been derived from the version of Junius, which gives, “Quod si non multum (supple, est illud quod dederit Deus, ex versu praec.),” etc. Because God answereth him in the joy of his heart. The man passes a calm and contented life, because God shows that he is pleased with him by the tranquil joy shed over his heart. The verb (the hiph. participle of ) is variously rendered. The Septuagint gives, , “God distracts him in the mirth of his heart;” Vulgate, Eo quod Deus occupet deliciis cot ejus; Ginsburg, “God causeth him to work for the enjoyment of his heart,” i.e. God assigns him work that he may thence derive enjoyment; Koster,” God makes him sing in the joy of his heart;” Delitzsch, Wright, and Plumptre, “God answers (corresponds with) the joy of his heart,” which the latter explains to mean “is felt to approve it as harmonizing, in its calm evenness, with his own blessedness, the tranquility of the wise man mirroring the tranquility of God.” But this modified Epicureanism is alien from the teaching of Koheleth. Rather the idea is that God answers him with, imparts to him, joy of heart, makes him sensible of his favorable regard by this inward feeling of satisfaction and content.

HOMILETICS

Est 5:1-7

Vanities in worship.

I. IRREVERENCE. Specially exhibited in entering upon Divine service. Discommended and rebuked as:

1. Inconsistent with the sanctity of the place of worshipthe house of God. Wherever men convene to offer homage to the Divine Being, in a magnificent cathedral or in a humble upper room, upon hillsides and moors, or in dens and caves of the earth, there is a dwelling-place of Jehovah no less than in the temple (Solomonic or post-exilic) or in the synagogue, of both which the Preacher probably thought. What lends sanctity to the spot in which worshippers assemble is not its material surroundings, artificial or natural (architectural elegance or cosmical beauty); it is not even the convening there of the worshippers themselves, however exalted their rank or sacred the character of the acts in which they engage. It is the unseen and spiritual, but real and supernatural, presence of God in the midst of his assembled saints (Exo 20:24; Psa 46:4-7; Mat 18:20; Mat 28:20); and the simple consideration of this fact, much more the realization of that nearness of God to which it points, should awaken in the breast of every one proceeding towards and crossing the threshold of a Christian sanctuary the feeling of awe which inspired Jacob on the heights of Bethel (Gen 28:17), Ethan the Ezrahite (Psa 89:7), and Isaiah in the temple. (Isa 6:1). The thought of God’s immediate neighborhood and of all that it implies, his observance of both the persons of his worshippers (Gen 16:16), and the secrets of their hearts (Psa 139:1), should put a hush on every spirit (Hab 2:20; Zec 2:13), and dispose each one to “keep his foot,” metaphorically, to “put off his shoe,” as Moses did at the bush (Exo 3:5), and Joshua in presence of the Captain of Jehovah’s host (Jos 5:15).

2. Opposed to the true character of Divine worship. When congregations assemble in the house of God to do homage to him whose presence fills the house, this end cannot be attained by offering the sacrifice of fools, i.e. by rendering such service as proceeds from unbelieving, disobedient, and hypocritical hearts (Pro 21:27), but only by assuming the attitude of one willing to hear (1Sa 3:10; Psa 85:8) and to obey not man but God (Psa 40:5). If unaccompanied by a disposition to do God’s will, mere external performances are of no value whatever, however imposing their magnificence or costly their production. What God desires in his servants is not the outward offering of sacrifices or celebration of ceremonies, but the inward devotion of the spirit (1Sa 15:22; Psa 51:16, Psa 51:17; Jer 7:21-23; Hos 6:6). The highest form of worship is not speaking of or giving to God, but hearing and receiving from God.

3. Proceeding from ignorance both of the sanctity of the place and of the spirituality of its worship. However the final clause may be rendered (see Exposition), its sense is that irreverence springs from ignorancefrom failing properly to understand the character either of that God they pretend to worship, or of that worship they affect to render. Ignorance of God, of his nature as spiritual, of his character as holy, of his presence as near, of his knowledge as all-observant, of his majesty as awe-inspiring, of his power as irresistible, is the prime root of all wrong worship, as Christ said of the Samaritans (Joh 4:22), and as Paul told the Athenians (Act 17:23).

II. FORMALITY. Manifested when engaged in Divine service and more particularly in prayer. Two phases of this evil commented on.

1. Rashness in prayer. (Verse 2.) Hasty utterance of whatever comes uppermost, as if any jangle of words might suffice for devotiona manner of prayer totally inconsistent with the thought that one is standing in the Divine presence. If a petitioner would hardly venture to lay his requests before an earthly sovereign, how much less should a suppliant draw near to Heaven’s throne without calm forethought and deliberation? Moreover, it is inconsistent with the real nature of prayer, which is a making known to God of the soul’s needs with thankful acknowledgment of the Divine mercies; and how can one either state his own wants or record God’s mercies who has never taken time to investigate the one or count up the other?

2. Prolixity in prayer. Much speaking, endless and unmeaning repetitionsa characteristic of Pharisaic devotions adverted to by Christ (Mat 6:7), and difficult to harmonize either with a due regard to the majesty of God or with the possession of that inward calm which is a necessary condition of all true prayer. As a dreamer’s eloquence, usually turgid and magniloquent, proceeds from an unquiet state of the brain, which during day has been unduly excited by a rush of business or by the worries of waking hours, so the multitude of words emitted by a “fool’s ‘voice is occasioned by the inward disquiet of a mind and heart that have not attained to rest in God. At the same time, “the admonition, ‘let thy words be few,’ is not meant to set limits to the fire of devotion, being directed, not against the inwardly devout, but against the superficially religious, who fancy that in the multitude of their words they have an equivalent for the devotion they lack” (Hengstenberg).

III. INSINCERITY. Displayed after leaving Divine service, more especially in the non-fulfillment of vows voluntarily taken while engaged in worship. Against this wickedness the preacher inveighs.

1. Because such conduct cannot be other than displeasing to God. “When thou vowest a vow, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed.” As the Almighty himself is “the same yesterday, and today, and for ever,” “without variableness or shadow of turning,” and “changeth not,” so he desires in all his worshippers the reflection at least of this perfection, and cannot regard with favor one who plays fast and loose with his promises to men, and far less with his vows to God.

2. Because such conduct is in no sense unavoidable. A worshipper is under no obligation to vow anything to Jehovah. Whatever is done in this direction must proceed from the clearest free-will. Hence, to escape the sin of breaking one’s vows, one is at liberty not to vow (Deu 23:21-23). Hence also should one cautiously guard against the utterance of rash and sinful vows like those of Jephthah (Jdg 11:30) and of Saul (1Sa 14:24), lest through fulfilling (no less than through breaking) them one should incur sin. Similarly, “we must not vow that which through the frailty of the flesh we have reason to fear we shall not be able to perform, as those that vow a single life and yet know not how to keep their vow” (Matthew Henry). The same remark applies to taking vows of total abstinence from meats and drinks.

3. Because such conduct cannot escape the just judgment of God. The rashly uttered vow, afterwards left unfulfilled, sets the speaker of it in the place of a sinner, upon whom as guilty God will inflict punishment. Thus through his mouth, his “flesh,” or his body, i.e. his whole personality, of which the flesh or body is the outer covering, is caused to suffer. Being just and holy, God can by no means clear the guilty (Exo 34:7), although he can justify the ungodly (Rom 4:5). Hence the vow-breaker cannot hope to elude the due reward of his infidelity.

4. Because such conduct is practically indefensible. To say before the angel or presiding minister in the temple or synagogue in whose hearing the vow haft been registered that the registration of it had been an error, was, in the judgment of the Preacher, no excuse, but rather an aggravation of the original offence, and a sure means of drawing down upon the offender the anger of God, and of causing God to effectually thwart and utterly destroy the designs his pretended worshipper had, first in making his vows and afterwards in breaking them; and so, when one retreats from protestations and promises made to God, it is no justification of his conduct in the eyes of others who may have listened to or become aware of his votive engagements, to aver that he had made them in error. Nor is it sufficient to excuse one in God’s sight to say that one was mistaken in having promised to do so-and-so. Hence, if one vows before God with regard to matters left in his option, it is his duty to fulfill these vows, even should it be to his hurt. But in all respects it is wiser and better not to vow except in such things as are already enjoined upon one by God; and should it be said that no possible need can arise for taking upon one’s self by voluntary obligation what already lies upon one by Divine prescription, this will not be denied. Yet one may vow to do what God has commanded in the sense of resolving to do italways in dependence on promised grace; and with regard to this no better counsel can be offered than that given by Harvey

“Call to thy God for grace to keep
Thy vows; and if thou break them, weep.

Weep for thy broken vows, and vow again:
Vows made with tears cannot be still in vain.”

LESSONS.

1. The condescension of God in accepting human worship.

2. The dignity of man that he can render such worship as God can accept.

3. The spirituality of all sincere worship of God.

4. The displeasure of God against all worship that is merely external.

Est 5:8, Est 5:9

The picture of an ideal state.

I. THE SOIL WELL CULTIVATED. As the land of a country is its principal source of wealth, where this is left untilled only destitution to the people upon it can ensue. Access to the broad acres of earth, to extract therefrom by means of labor the treasures therein deposited, constitutes an indispensable prerequisite to the material prosperity of any province or empire. Hence the Preacher depicts, or enables us to depict, a state or condition of things in which this is realizedthe common people spread abroad upon the soil and engaged in its cultivation; the upper classes or feudal lords deriving their support from the same soil in the shape of rents, and even the king receiving from it in the form of taxes his imperial revenues.

II. THE LAW EQUALLY ADMINISTERED. The opposite of this is the picture sketched by the Preacher, who probably transferred to his pages a spectacle often witnessed in Palestine during the years of Persian domination”the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province;” the laboring classes despoiled of their scanty savings, and even denied their fair share in the fruits of their own industry, ground down and oppressed by the tyranny and avarice of their social and political superiors, the satraps and other officers who ruled them, and these again preyed on by fiercer harpies above them, and so on, up through each ascending rank of dignitaries, till the last and highest was reached. Reverse the state of matters thus described, and imagine all classes in the community dwelling together in harmony, and conspiring to advance each other’s comfort and happinessthe toiling millions cheerfully, honestly, and diligently cultivating the soil, and manufacturing its products into higher forms of wealth and beauty, the upper classes jealously guarding the rights and furthering the welfare of these industrious artisans, and each regarding the other with confidence and esteemthe poet’s dream of Utopia, in which “all men’s good” should be “each man’s rule,” would then be realized:

III. THE SOVEREIGN BENEFICENTLY ENTERPRISING. Not in pushing forward his own personal aggrandizement, which in ancient Oriental countries was often done at the expense of his subjects, as by Pharaoh of Egypt (Exo 1:11) and Solomon of Israel and Judah (1Ki 12:4), but by devoting his energies to further the material (.and intellectual) advancement of his people. “But the profit of a land every way is a king that maketh himself servant to the field,” or “is a king over the cultivated field”, or is a king devoted to agriculture (Rosenmller, Delitzsch, Wright), like Uzziah of Judah, who “loved husbandry” (2Ch 26:10). It is only amplifying this thought to represent the ideal state as one in which the king or emperor consecrates his life and powers to the honorable and laborious task of promoting the material prosperity and temporal happiness of his subjects by removing the yoke from agriculture, fostering trade and commerce, encouraging manufactures and inventions aiding science and art, diffusing education, and stimulating his people upward in every possible way towards the ideal of all free peoples, viz. self-government.

IV. THE DEITY APPROVING. Here again the Preacher’s picture must be changed. What he beheld was wholesale oppression and robbery practiced by the upper and powerful classes against the under and powerless classes, or in modern phrase, “the masses; and God over both looking on in calm silence (Psa 50:21), but by no means unperturbed indifference (Zep 1:12), accurately noting all the wickedness going on beneath the sun (Psa 33:13-15), and quietly waiting his own time to call it to account (Ecc 3:15, Ecc 3:17; Ecc 11:9; Ecc 12:14). What must be substituted is a state of matters in which over the well-organized, industrious, peaceful, co-operating community the almighty Disposer of events, the King of nations and King of kings, presides, beaming on them with his gracious smile (Num 6:24-26) and establishing the work of their hands upon them (Psa 90:17).

Learn:

1. The duty of the state to seek the welfare of all.

2. The duty of each to promote the welfare of the state.

Est 5:8 -17

A sermon on the vanity of riches.

I. FREQUENTLY ACQUIRED BY WRONG. AS, for instance, by oppression and robbery (Est 5:8). That honest labor sometimes leads to affluence cannot be denied (Pro 10:4); more often, however, it is the ungodly who increase in riches (Psa 73:12), and that, too, by means of their ungodliness (Pro 1:19; Pro 22:16; Pro 28:20; Hab 2:6, Hab 2:9; 1Ti 6:9, 1Ti 6:10). Hence the question arises whether, if riches cannot be obtained without plunging into all sorts of wickedness, they are worth seeking to obtain at all; whether, if to secure them a man must not only practice dishonesty, theft, oppression, and perhaps worse, but convert his soul into a harbor of divers pernicious lusts, such as avarice, covetousness, and envy, it is really a good bargain to secure them at such a cost. Christ’s question, “What shall it profit a man,” etc.? (Mat 16:26) has a bearing on this.

II. ALWAYS INCAPABLE OF YIELDING SATISFACTION. “He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase” (Est 5:10). In addition to the well-known fact that material wealth has no power to impart solid satisfaction to the better instincts of the soul (Luk 12:15)a fact eloquently commented on by Burns (‘Epistle to Davie’)

“It’s no in titles nor in rank,
It’s no in wealth like Lou’on Bank,

To purchase peace and rest,” etc.

the appetite for wealth grows by what it feeds on. The rich are ever craving for more. “The avaricious man is always wanting,” said Horace (‘Epist.,’ 1.2. 26); while Ovid wrote of rich men, “Both their wealth and a furious lust of wealth increase, and when they possess the most they seek for more.” Hence, to use another rendering, “He whose love cleaveth to abundance hath nothing of it” (Delitzsch). “He who hangs his heart on the continual tumult, noise, pomp, of more numerous and greater possessions if possible, to all real profiti.e; all pleasant, peaceful enjoyment is lost” (ibid.).

III. OFTEN MULTIPLY THEIR OWNER‘S CARES.

1. Numerous dependents. Unless he is a miser, “who shuts up his money in chests and only feeds himself in looking at it with closed doors” (Delitzsch), the rich man, like Job (Job 1:3) and Solomon (1Ki 4:2, etc.), will maintain a large and expensive household, which will eat up his substance, so that, notwithstanding all his wealth, he shall have little more for his portion in the same than the satisfaction of seeing it pass through his hands (verse 11). As Pheraulas the Persian observed to a Sacian youth, who congratulated him on being rich, “Do you think, Sacian, that I live with more pleasure the more I possess? Do you not know that I neither eat nor drink nor sleep with a particle more pleasure now than when I was poor? But by having this abundance I gain merely this, that I have to guard more, to distribute more to others, and to have the trouble of taking care of more; for a great many domestics now demand of me their food, their drink, and their clothes Whosoever, therefore, is greatly pleased with the possession of riches will, be assured, feel annoyed at the expenditure of them” (Xenophon, ‘Cyropaedia,’ Job 8:3, 39-44).

2. Increased anxieties. The rich man, through the abundance of his riches, is worried with cares, which pursue him into the night, and will not suffer hint to sleep (verse 12), for thinking of how he shall protect his wealth against the midnight prowler, of how he shall increase it by successful trade and profitable investment, of how he shall employ it so as to extract from it the largest quantity of enjoyment; whereas the laboring man, whether he eats little or much, drops into refreshing slumber the moment he lays his head upon his pillow, untroubled by anxious thoughts as to how he shall dispose of his wealth, which consists chiefly in the fewness of his wants. So sang Horace long ago of “gentle sleep,” which “scorns not the humble abodes of ploughmen” (‘Odes,’ Job 3:1.21-23), and Virgil of the tillers of the soil, who “want not slumber sweet beneath the trees” (‘Georg.,’ 2:469); so wrote Shakespeare of the “honey-heavy dew of slumber” (‘Julius Caesar,’ act it. sc. 1), describing it as

“Sore labor’s bath,

Balm of hurt minds, great nature’s second course,
Chief nourisher in life’s feast;”

(‘Macbeth,’ act 2. sc. 2.)

representing it as lying rather

“In smoky cribs

Than in the perfumed chambers of the great:”

(‘Henry IV.,’ Part II; act 3. sc. 1.)

and depicting the shepherd’s “wonted sleep under a fresh tree’s shade” as “far beyond a prince’s delicates” (‘Henry VI.,’ act it. sc. 5).

IV. NOT SELDOM DISAPPOINT THE HOPES THEY HAVE RAISED.

1. The hope of never-failing happiness. The rich man hopes that in future years his wealth will be to him a source of comfort (Luk 12:19). As the years go by he discovers they have only been kept to his hurt (verse 13)if not physically or mentally, at least morally and spiritually (1Ti 6:10, 1Ti 6:17); and the fact is often so, whether he discovers it or not.

2. The hope of never knowing waist. The rich man expects that, having safely locked them up in a prudent speculation, he will keep them at least during his lifetime; but alas! the speculation turns out “an evil adventure,” and his much-prized riches perish (verse 14).

3. The hope of perpetuating his name. Once more the rich man pleases himself with the prospect of founding a family by leaving his son the fortune he has heaped up by toil, thrift, and profitable speculation. By the time he comes to die he has nothing in his hand to bequeath, and so is forced to bid farewell to his hopes and leave his son a pauper.

V. MUST EVENTUALLY BE LEFT BY ALL.

1. Absolutely. However rich a man may grow in his lifetime, of all he has amassed he must divest himself at the grave’s mouth, as Claudio in the prison is reminded by the duke-

“If thou art rich, thou art poor;
For, like an ass whose back with ingots bows,
Thou bent’st thy riches but a journey,
And death unloads thee.”

(‘Measure for Measure,’ act 3. se. 1.)

“As he came forth of his mother’s womb, naked shall he return to go as he came, and shall take nothing of his labor, which he may carry away in his hand” (verse 15; cf. Job 1:21); for as “we brought nothing into this world,” so it is “certain we can carry nothing out” (1Ti 6:7).

2. Without compensation. “What profit,” then, the Preacher asks, has the rich man who has labored all his days to amass wealth? The answer is, “Nothing! he has simply labored for the wind.” Igor is this the worst. To have had a pleasant time of it before being obliged to part with his wealth would have been a compensation, however slight, to the rich man; but for the most part even this is denied him. In order to amass his riches he has commonly been found to play the part of a miser, “eating in the dark to save candle-light, or working all day and waiting till nightfall before he sits down to a meal” (Plumptre); or, if the words “eating in darkness” be taken metaphorically, while gathering gold he has passed his existence in gloom and sadness, having no light in his heart (Hengstenberg), he has fallen into sore vexation at the failure of many of his plans, become morbidly disposed, “diseased in mind and body,” and even waxed wrathful at God, himself, and all the world.

LESSONS.

1. The duty of moderating one’s pursuit of earthly fiches.

2. The wisdom of laying up for one’s self treasures in heaven.

3. The happiness enjoyed by the poor.

Verses 18-20

The picture of a “good and comely” life.

I. THE LABOR OF THE HANDS REWARDED. The toiler spends not his strength for naught and in vain (Isa 49:4), but with the sweat of his brow earns for himself bread to eat, water to drink, and raiment to put on (Gen 28:20). Work and food the two first requisites of a good and comely life.

II. THE GOOD THINGS OF LIFE ENJOYED. Not only has the toiler the pleasant satisfaction of being able to earn through his personal exertions something, yea, enough, to eat and drink and to clothe himself withal, but over and above he can eat and drink and wear that which he has earned, and generally rejoice in that which his hands have won. Health and cheerfulness the next two requisites of a good and comely life.

III. THE ILLS OF EXISTENCE FORGOTTEN. If not entirely exempt from ills, since there is no man born of woman who is not heir to trouble (Job 5:7; Job 14:1), yet these affect him so slightly and leave so small impression on his soul, that the even tenor of his life flows on, and he hardly remembers the days as they pass. Equanimity and hopefulness a third pair of requisites for a good and comely life.

IV. THE GOODNESS OF HEAVEN RECOGNIZED. A “good and comely” life differs from mere animal existence in this, that it acknowledges all it receives and enjoys as a portion marked out for it by the sovereign appointment, and bestowed upon it by the gracious bounty of God (Jas 1:17). Gratitude and religion a fourth pair of requisites for a good and comely life.

V. THE APPROBATION OF GOD EXPERIENCED. The joy of such a life, being more than mere sensuous gratification, and springing up within the deep recesses of the soul, being in fact pure heart-joy, is not displeasing to God, but, on the contrary, is by him observed, answered, and confirmed. Peace and joy the last and highest pair of requisites for a good and comely life.

Learn:

1. The propriety of striving after an ideal life.

2. The necessity of aiming at improved surroundings of existence.

3. The impossibility of reaching Utopia either for the state or the individual without religion.

HOMILIES BY D. THOMAS

Est 5:1

The temple and the worshippers.

It is evident that the services of the pious Israelites were by no means merely sacrificial and ceremonial. There is a reflective and intellectual character attributed to the approach of the Hebrew worshippers to their God. The practical admonitions of this passage have reference, not to a formal, but to an intelligent and thoughtful worship.

I. THE HOUSE OF GOD. By this is to be understood no doubt a place, a building, probably the temple at Jerusalem. But clearly it follows from this language that in the view of the writer of Ecclesiastes the idea of the locality, the edifice, is almost lost sight of in the idea of the spiritual presence of Jehovah, and in the society and fellowship of sincere and devout worshippers. God, it was well understood, dwelleth not in temples made with hands, but abideth in his people’s hearts.

II. THE SACRIFICE OF FOLLY. In every large gathering of professed worshippers there is reason to fear there are those with whom worship is nothing but a form, a custom. The sacrifice of such is outward only; their postures, their words, may be unexceptionable, but the heart is absent from the service. Inattention, want of true interest, unspirituality, take the place of those penitential acknowledgmentsthat heavenward aspirationwhich are acceptable to him who searcheth the hearts and trieth the reins of the children of men. The sacrifice of such formal and irreverent worshippers is justly designated a sacrifice of fools. They consider not their own nature, their own needs; they consider not the attributes of him whom they profess to approach with the language of adoration, of gratitude, of petition. They are, therefore, not only irreligious; they are foolish, and they seem to say to every sensible observer that they are fools.

III. THE WORSHIP OF THE WISE. In contrast with the careless and undevout we have here depicted the spirit and the demeanor of true worshippers. They are characterized by:

1. Self-restraint. The modest repression of all that savors of self-assertion seems to be intended by the admonition, “Keep thy foot,” which is as much as to say, “Take heed to thy steps, observe with care thy way, wander not from the path of sincerity, beware of indifference and of obtrusiveness.’

2. Reference. Such as becomes the creature in approaching the Creator in whose hand his breath is, and whose are all his ways; such as becomes the sinner in addressing a holy God, whose Law has been broken, whose favor has to be implored.

3. A spirit of attentive and submissive hearing. “Speak, Lord; for thy servant heareth,” is language becoming to the lowly and reverent worshipper; he shall be made acquainted with God’s Law, and he shall rejoice in God’s promises.T.

Est 5:2

Reverence, reticence, and brevity in devotion.

What a contrast is there between this sound and sober counsel, and the precepts and customs prevalent among the heathen! These latter have corrupted the very practice of devotion; whilst those who acknowledge the authority of the Scriptures condemn themselves if their worship is superficial, pretentious, formal, and insincere.

I. THE RULES OF DEVOTION.

1. Avoid profane rashness and precipitancy. When rashness and haste are forbidden, it is not intended to condemn ejaculatory or extempore prayer. There are occasions when such prayer is the natural and appropriate expression of the deep feelings of the heart; when one cannot pause to weigh one’s words, when one cannot fall back upon liturgy or litany, however scriptural and rich. What is censured is ill-considered prayer, which is not properly prayer at all, but the outpouring of ill temper and petulance. Such utterances may be profane, and are certainly unsuitable, unbecoming.

2. Avoid verbiage. When praise and prayer take shape in many words, there is danger of using “vain repetitions,” against which our Lord Christ has so urgently warned his disciples. Long and diffuse devotions are probably addressed rather to men than to God. They are unnecessary and unprofitable, for God does not need them; they are irreverential, for they betoken a mind more occupied about self than about the Supreme. But this precept does not preclude urgency and even repetition when such are dictated by profound feeling and by special circumstances.

II. THE REASON OF THESE RULES.

1. The nature, the character of God himself. “He is in heaven.” By heaven we are to understand the eternal sphere apart from and above time, earth, and sense. We are not to rank God with earthly potentates, but are to bear in mind his distinctness and superiority. As our Creator, he knows both our emotions and our wants; as our Lord and Judge, he knows our sins and frailties; as our Savior, he knows our penitence and faith. Such considerations may well preclude familiarity, rashness, verbosity, irreverence. To think rightly of God, to feel aright with regard to him, is to be preserved from such faults and errors as are here mentioned with censure.

2. The position of men. Being upon earth, men partake in the feebleness and finiteness of the created. They are suppliants; and as such they should ever approach the throne of grace with reverence and humiliation. They are sinners; and should imitate the spirit of him who, when he came up into the temple to pray, cried, “God be merciful to me a sinner! ‘This was a short prayer; but he who offered it was accepted and justified.T.

Est 5:4, Est 5:5

The law of the vow.

There are those who would disapprove of the violation of a promise given to a fellow-man, who think lightly of evading a promise solemnly volunteered to the Creator. It may be said that a fellow-man might suffer from such neglect or dereliction, but that God can suffer no loss or harm if a vow be not fulfilled. Such an extenuation or excuse for violating vows arises from the too common notion that the moral character of an action depends upon the consequences that follow it, and not upon the principles that direct it. A man’s conduct may be wrong even if no one is injured by it; for he may violate both his own nature and the moral law itself.

I. THE NATURE OF THE VOW. When some signal favor has been experienced, some forbearance exercised on a man’s behalf, he desires to evince his gratitude, to do something which in ordinary circumstances he would probably not have done, and he makes a vow unto God, sacredly’ promising to offer some gift, to perform some service. Or even more commonly, the vow is made in hope of some benefit desired, and its fulfillment is conditional upon a petition being favorably answered, a desire being gratified.

II. THE VOLUNTARINESS OF THE VOW. It is presumed that no constraint is exercised, that the promise made to Heaven is the free and spontaneous expression of religious feeling. The language of Peter to Ananias expresses this aspect of the proceeding: “Whiles it remained, did it not remain thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thy power?”

III. THE OBLIGATION OF THE VOW. It is questionable whether vows are in all cases expedient. A vow to act sinfully is certainly not binding. And there are some vows which it is unwise in some circumstances, if not in all circumstances, to make; this is the case especially with vows which seem to make too great a demand upon human nature, which are indeed against nature; e.g. vows of celibacy, and of obedience to fellow-creatures as fallible as are those who bind themselves to obey. But if a vow be made knowingly and voluntarily, and if its fulfillment be not wrong, then the text assures us it is obligatory, and should be paid.

IV. THE FOLLY OF DEFERRING TO PAY THE VOW. There are disagreeable duties, which weak persons admit to be duties, and intend to discharge, but the discharge of which they postpone. Such duties do not become easier or more agreeable because deferred. Generally speaking, when conscience tells us that a certain thing ought to be done, the sooner we do it the better. So with the vow. “Defer not to pay it; for God hath no pleasure in fools.”

V. THE SIN OF NEGLECTING AND REPUDIATING THE VOW. The vow is an evidence, it may be presumed, that there existed at the time, in the mind of him who made it, strong feelings and earnest purposes. Now, for one who has passed through such experiences so far to forget or abjure them as to act as if the vow had never been made, is a proof of religious declension and of inconsistency. How common is such “backsliding”! It is said, “Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.” He who vows not contracts no special obligation, whilst he who vows and withholds payment repudiates a solemn obligation which he has undertaken. A warning is thus given to which it is important for those especially to give heed who are liable to religious excitement and enthusiasm. If such characters yield as readily to evil influences as to good, their impressions may be a curse rather than a blessing, or at least may be the occasion of moral deterioration. None can feel and resolve and pray, and then afterwards act in opposition to their purest feelings, their highest resolves, their fervent prayers, without suffering serious harm, without weakening their moral power, without incurring the just displeasure of the righteous Governor and Lord of all.T.

Est 5:8

The oppressor’s accountability.

We are not taught in this verse to disregard the wrongs of our fellow-creatures, to shut our eyes to deeds of iniquity, to close our ears against the cry of the suffering, to steel our heart against the anguish of the oppressed. But we are cautioned against drawing hasty and ill-considered conclusions from the prevalence of injustice; we are encouraged to cherish faith in the overruling and retributive providence of God.

I. THE FACT OF OPPRESSION. Such cases as are here referred to exist in every state; but in the East they have always existed in great numbers. Despotic governments are more favorable to oppression than those states where free institutions are established and where popular rights are respected. Reference is made:

1. To the maltreatment of the poor, who are powerless to defend themselves, and who have no helper.

2. To the withholding and perversion of justice.

II. THE DISTRESS AND PERPLEXITY NATURALLY OCCASIONED BY THE EXISTENCE OF OPPRESSION.

1. To the sufferers themselves; who are in some cases deprived of liberty, in some cases robbed of their property, in other cases injured in their person.

2. The spectators of such wrongs are aroused to sympathy, pity, and indignation. No rightly constituted mind can witness injustice without resentment. Even those who themselves exercise rights and enjoy privileges lose much of the pleasure and advantage of their own position by reason of the wrongs which their neighbors endure at the hand of power and cruelty.

3. Society is in danger of corruption when the laws are overridden by selfishness, avarice, and lust; when righteousness is scoffed at, and when men’s best instincts and convictions are outraged.

III. THE REDRESS FOR WRONG IN THE UNIVERSAL GOVERNMENT OF GOD.

1. Oppression is not unnoticed. Whether the oppressor hopes to escape, or fears to be called to account, it is for the spectator of his evil deeds to remember that “One higher than the high regardeth.”

2. Oppression is not unrecorded. The iniquities of the unjust judge, of the arbitrary sovereign, of the villainous workman who violently hinders his fellow-workman from earning an honest livelihood,all are written in the book of God. Even when deeds of oppression are wrought in the sacred name of religion by the persecutor and the inquisitor, such deeds are remembered, and will in due time be brought to light.

3. Oppression will not be unavenged. Either now in this world, or hereafter in the state of retribution, the oppressor, like every other sinner, shall be brought to the bar of Divine justice. God shall bring every man into judgment. As a man soweth, so shall he also reap. The wicked shall not go unpunished.T.

Est 5:9

The earth and man.

Whatever obscurity may attach to the interpretation of this verse, in any case it represents the dependence of the inhabitants of earth upon the produce of the soil.

I. THE FACT OF THE BOUNTEOUSNESS OF THE FRUITFUL EARTH.

1. Man’s body is fashioned out of its dust. Whatever may have been the process by which the animal nature of man was prepared as the lodging and the vehicle of the immortal spirit, there is no question as to the fact that the human body is a part of nature, that it is composed of elements of a nature similar to those existing around, that it is subject to physical law. All this seems implied in the statement that the human frame was formed of the dust of the ground.

2. Man’s body is supported by its produce. Directly or indirectly, man’s corporeal nature is nourished by the material substances which exist in various forms upon the surface of the earth. The vegetable and animal creation minister to man’s needs and growth.

3. Man’s body is resolved into its substance. “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” The earth provides man with his food, his raiment, his dwelling, and his grave.

II. THE UNIVERSALITY OF THE BOUNTEOUSNESS OF THE EARTH.

1. The least is not overlooked, the poorest is cared for, fed, and sheltered.

2. The greatest is not independent. All men share the same nature, and sit at the same table: “The king himself is served by the field.”

LESSONS.

1. We have to learn our dependence upon what is lower than ourselves. Whilst we are in this earth, whilst we share this corporeal nature, the material ministers to bodily needs, and must not be disdained or despised.

2. We should rise to an apprehension of our real dependence upon Divine providence. “The earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.” It is ordered by God’s wisdom that the earth should be the instrument of good to all his creatures, even to the highest. And the enlightened and thoughtful will not fail to ascend from the instrument to him that fashioned it, from the abode to him that built it, from the means of well-being to him who appointed and provided them all, and who intended the earth and all that is in it to teach his intelligent creatures something of his glorious character and gracious purposes.T.

Est 5:10 -17

The unsatisfying nature of riches.

To love wealth for its own sake is ridiculous. To desire it for the sake of the advantages it may secure is natural, and (within limits) is not blamable. To set the heart upon it for such purposes, to long for it above higher good, to be absorbed in its quest, is sinful. The wise man points out the insufficiency of material possessions to satisfy the nature of man. The reflections here recorded are the result of wide observation and of personal experience.

I. RICHES CANNOT AFFORD SATISFACTION TO THOSE WHO SET THEIR AFFECTION UPON THEM. A man who uses his property for lawful ends, and regards it in the true light as a provision made by God’s wisdom and bounty for his wants, need know nothing of the experience recorded in Est 5:10. But he who lovesi.e; desires with ardent desire, and as the chief good of lifesilver and abundance, shall not be satisfied with wealth when it is attained. It is not in the nature of earthly good to quench the deep desires of man’s immoral spirit.

II. RICHES ARE CONSUMED BY THOSE WHO ARE DEPENDENT UPON THEM. A large family, a circle of dependents, needy relatives, are the cause of the disappearance even of large revenues. This is no trouble to a man who judges justly; but to a foolish man whose one desire is to accumulate, it is a distress to witness the necessary expenditure involved in family and social claims.

III. RICHES ARE a SOURCE OF ANXIETY TO THE POSSESSOR. The laboring man, who earns and eats his daily bread, and depends for to-morrow’s supply upon to-morrow’s toil, sleeps sweetly; whilst the capitalist and investor are wakeful by reason of many anxieties. A ship richly freighted may be wrecked, and the cargo lost; a company in which large sums have been invested may fail; a mine of precious metal upon which money has been spent, and from which much is hoped, may cease to be productive. An estate may no longer be profitable; thieves may break through and steal jewels and bullion. As surely as a man owns more than is needed for the supply of his daily wants, so surely is he liable to solicitude and care.

IV. RICHES MAY EVEN PROVE INJURIOUS TO THEIR OWNER. In some states of society the possession of wealth is likely to bring down upon the rich the envy and cupidity of a despotic ruler, who ill treats the wealthy in order to secure his riches for himself. And in all states of society there is danger lest wealth should be the occasion of moral injury, by enkindling evil passions, envy on the part of the poor, and in return hatred and suspicion on the part of the wealthy; or by leading to flattery, which in turn produces vanity and contemptuousness.

V. RICHES ARE OF NO AVAIL BEYOND THIS LIFE. They thus add, in the case of the avaricious, another sting to death; for clutch and grasp them as he may, they must be left behind. A man spends his whole life, and exhausts all his energies, in gathering together a “fortune;” no sooner has he succeeded than he is summoned to return naked to the earth, carrying nothing in his hand, poor as he came into the scene of his toils, his success, his disappointments. The king of terrors cannot be bribed. A mine of wealth cannot buy a day of life.

VI. RICHES MAY BE WASTED BY THE RICH MAN‘S HEIRS. This was a misfortune of which the writer of Ecclesiastes seems to have been well aware from his prolonged observation of human life. One may gather; but who shall scatter? He to whom wealth is everything has no security that his property shall not, after his death, come into the hands of those who shall squander it in dissipation, or waste it in reckless speculations. This also is vanity.

APPLICATION. These things being so, the moral is obvious. The poor man may rest contented with his lot, for he knows not whether increase of possessions would bring him increase of happiness. The prosperous man may well give heed to the admonition, “If riches increase, set not your heart upon them.”T.

Verses 18-20

The good things appointed for man by God.

Some detect in these verses the ring of Epicurean morals. But the difference is vast between desiring and rejoicing in the things of this world as mere means of pleasure, and accepting them with gratitude and using them with moderation and prudence, as the gifts of a Father’s bounty and the expression of a Father’s love.

I. THE GOOD THINGS OF THIS WORLD COME FROM GOD. It is God’s earth which provides our sustenance; it is God’s creative wisdom that provides our companionships; it is God who gives us power to acquire, to use, and to enjoy his gifts. All is from God.

II. THE ENJOYMENT OF THINGS IN THEMSELVES GOOD IS INTENDED, AND APPOINTED BY DIVINE WISDOM AND GOODNESS. They were mot given to tempt or to curse man, but to gladden his heart and to enrich his life. Benevolence is the impulse of the Divine nature. God is “good to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works.”

III. THE ENJOYMENT OF THESE GOOD THINGS MAY BE RENDERED THE OCCASION OF FELLOWSHIP WITH GOD AND THANKSGIVING TO GOD. Thus even the common things of earth may be glorified and made beautiful by their devotion to the highest of all purposes. Through them the Giver of all may be praised, and the heart of the grateful recipient may be raised to fellowship with “the Father of the spirits of all flesh.”

IV. THE ABUSE OF GOD‘S GOOD GIFTS IS OWING TO HUMAN ERROR AND SIN. They are so often abused that it is not to be wondered at that men come to think them evil in themselves. But in such cases, the blame lies not with the Giver, but with the recipient, who turns the very honey into gall.T.

HOMILIES BY W. CLARKSON

Est 5:1, Est 5:2

Acceptable service.

Although the precise meaning of the Preacher is open to some doubt, we shall not go wrong in letting these words speak to us of

I. THE FUTILITY OF FORMAL WORSHIP. Reference is made to

(1) the offering of sacrifice (Est 5:1), and

(2) the repetition of devotional phrases.

We may find a Christian parallel in the reception of sacraments, and in the “prayers” and psalmody of the Church. We know that the purest spirituality may breathe in these, and may be nourished by these, but we know also

(1) that they may fail to express any real and pure devotion;

(2) that in this case they also fail in winning the favor of God; and

(3) that they leave the soul rather the worse than the better, for in such futile worship there is a dangerous delusiveness which is apt to lead. to a false and even fatal sense of security.

II. ACCEPTABLE SERVICE. This is threefold.

1. Reverence. This is strongly implied, especially in the second verse. Let the worshipper realize that he is in “the house of God,” none other and no less than that (see Gen 28:17). Let him realize that “God is in heaven,” etc.; that he is bowing before the Infinite One himself; that he is addressing him who, in his Divine nature and in his unapproachable rank, is immeasurably removed above himself; that he is speaking to One who sees the actions of every life, and knows the secrets of all hearts, and who needs not, therefore, to be informed of what we do or what we feel. Let language be spared, let sacred thought and solemn feeling flow; let a sense of human littleness and of the Divine majesty silence all insincerity, and fill the soul with reverential awe.

2. Docility. “Be more ready [‘draw nigh,’ Revised Version] to hear,” etc. There is much virtue in docility. Our Lord strongly commended the child-spirit as the condition of entrance into the kingdom; and was not this principally because the spirit of childhood is that of docilityeagerness to know, readiness to receive? We should draw nigh to God in his house, not that we may hear our favorite dogmas once more exalted or enforced, but that we may hear the mind and know the will of Christ better than we have done before; that we may “be filled with the knowledge of his will;” that it may become increasingly true that “we have the mind of Christ.” To desire to part with our errors, our ignorance, our prejudices, our half-views, our misconceptions, and to have a closer vision of our Lord and of his Divine truth,this is acceptable worship.

3. Obedience. “Keep thy foot; go to the house of God ‘with a straight foot,’ a foot trained to walk in the path of holy obedience.” Go to the house of God as one that “has clean hands and a pure heart;” as one that “lifts up holy hands” unto God. To go up to “offer sacrifice,” or “make long prayers,” with the determination in the heart to continue a life of impurity, or intemperance, or dishonesty, or injustice, or harshness toward the weak and the dependent,this is to mock our Maker; it is to grieve the Father of spirits, the Lord of holiness and love. But, on the other hand, to go up to his sanctuary with a pure desire and real resolve to turn from our evil way, and to strive, against all outward hostility and all inward impulses, to walk in our integrity,this is acceptable with God. “To obey is better than sacrifice;” and it is the spirit of obedience rather than the overt act of correctness for which the righteous Lord is looking.C.

Est 5:4-6

Vowing and paying.

We may regard the subject of vows in two aspects.

I. THEIR CHARACTER. They may be of:

1. An entirely obligatory character. We may solemnly promise to God that which we may not withhold without sin. But this may be shortly summed up in one wordourselves. We owe to him ourselves, all that we are and have, our powers and our possessions. And the first thing that becomes us all is to present ourselves before God in a most solemn act of surrender, in which we deliberately resolve and undertake to yield to him our heart and life thenceforth and for ever. In this great crisis of our spiritual history we make the one supreme vow with which all others are incomparable. It should be made in the exercise of all the powers of our nature; not under any kind of compulsion, but as freely as fully, as intelligently as heartily. It is one that is, of course, to be renewed, and this both regularly, and also on all special occasions. It is a vow to be confirmed every time we bow in the sanctuary, and every time we gather at the table of the Lord.

2. Optional. And of these vows which may be described as optional, there are

(1) those that are conditional; as when a man promises that if God give him wealth he will devote a large proportion of it to his direct service (see Gen 28:22); or that if God restore his health he will consecrate an his time and all his possessions to the proclamation of his truth.

(2) Those that are unconditional; as when

(a) a man determines that thenceforth he will give a certain fixed proportion of his income to the cause of Christ; or

(b) when he pledges himself to abstain from some particular indulgence which is hurtful to himself or is a temptation to others.

II. THE SPIRIT IN WHICH THEY SHOULD BE MADE AND FULFILLED.

1. With devout deliberation. It is a serious mistake for a man to undertake that which he fails to carry out.

(1) It is offensive to God (Est 5:4).

(2) It is injurious to the man himself; he is in a distinctly worse spiritual position after failure than he would have been if he had not entered into an engagement (Est 5:5). We should not promise anything in ignorance of ourselves, and then lose our self-respect by a humiliating withdrawal.

2. In a spirit of prompt and cheerful obedience. What we vow to do we should do

(1) without delay, “deferring not.” There is always danger in delay. To-morrow we shall be further in time from the hour of solemn resolution, and its force will be lessened by the distance. Also

(2) cheerfully; for we may be sure that God loveth a cheerful promise-keeperone that does what he undertook to do, although it proves to be of greater dimensions or to be attended with severer effort than he at first imagined it would.

3. With patient persistency; not allowing anything to come between himself and his honorable fulfillment.

(1) Are we fully redeeming our vows of Christian consecration in the daily life that we are living?

(2) Are we paying the vows we made in some dark hour of need (see Psa 66:13, Psa 66:14)?C.

Est 5:8 -16

Comfort in confusion.

In the time and the country to which the text belongs there was a very large amount of injustice, rapacity, insecurity. Men could not count on enjoying the fruits of their labor; they were in serious danger of being wronged, or even “done to death;” there were not the constitutional guards and fences with which we are familiar now and here. The political and social conditions of the age and of the land. added much to the seriousness of the great problems of the moralist. But though he was perplexed, he was not without light and comfort. There was that

I. AFFORDED BY REASON AND EXPERIENCE. What if it were true that oppression was often to be witnessed, and, with oppression, the suffering of the weak, yet it was to be remembered that:

1. There was often an appeal to a higher authority, and the unrighteous sentence was reversed (Est 5:8).

2. There was always reason to hope that injustice and tyranny would be short-lived (Est 5:9). The king was served by the field; he was by no means independent of those who lived by manual labor; he was as much their subject in fact and truth as they were his in form and in law; he could not afford to live in their disregard and disapproval.

3. Successful oppression was far from being satisfactory to those who practiced it.

(1) No avaricious man was ever satisfied with the money he made; he was always coveting more; the thirst for gold lived on, and grew by what it gained (Est 5:10).

(2) The wealthy man found that he could not enjoy more than a fraction of what he acquired; he was compelled to see others partaking of that which his own toil had earned (Est 5:11).

(3) The successful man was worried and burdened with his own wealth; the fear of losing balanced, if it did not more than counterbalance, the enjoyment of acquisition (Est 5:12).

(4) No rich man could be sure of the disposition of his hardly won and carefully stored treasure his son might scatter it in sin and folly (Est 5:13, Est 5:14).

(5) No man can take a solitary fraction of his goods beyond the boundary of life (verses 15, 16).

4. Obscurity is not without its own advantage.

(1) It sleeps the sweet sleep of security; it has nothing to lose; it holds out no bait to the despoiler (Est 5:12).

(2) It enjoys the fruit of its labor, untroubled by the ambitions, unwearied with the excessive toils, unworried by the frequent vexations of those who aim at higher posts and move in larger spheres.

II. AFFORDED BY REVELATION. The godly man, and more especially he to whom Jesus Christ has spoken, contents himselfso far as it is right and welt to be contented in the midst of confusion and perversionwith the peace-bringing considerations:

1. That Infinite Wisdom is overruling, and will direct all things to a right issue.

2. That it is not our circumstances, but our character, that should chiefly concern us. To be pure, true, loyal, helpful, Christ-like, is immeasurably more than to have and to hold any quantity of treasure, any place or rank whatsoeverse

3. That we who travel to a heavenly home, who look forward to a “crown of life,” can afford to wait for our heritage.C.

Verses 15, 16

The difference at death.

Even when we have been long looking for the departure of one whose powers as well as his days are spent, his death, when it does come, makes a great difference to us. Between life at its lowest and death there is a great and felt interval. How much more must this be the case to the departed himself! What a difference to him between this life and that to which he goes! Perhaps less than we imagine, yet doubtless very great. The text suggests to us

I. WHAT WE MUST LEAVE BEHIND US AT DEATH.

1. Our worldly goods. This is an obvious fact, which painfully impressed the Preacher (text), and which comforted the psalmist (Psa 49:16, Psa 49:17). It is a fact that should make the wise less careful to acquire and to save.

2. Our reputation. The reputation for wisdom or folly, for integrity or dishonesty, for kindness or severity, which our life has been building up, death cannot destroy, through whatever experiences we may then pass. We must be content to leave that behind to be associated with our name in the memories of men, for their benediction or for their reproach.

3. The influence for good or evil we have exerted on human souls. These we cannot remove, nor can we stay to deepen or to counteract them; they are our most important legacies.

II. WHAT WE MAY LEAVE BEHIND US.

1. A wise disposition of our property. A sagacious statesman once said that he never quite made up his mind about his neighbor’s character until he had seen his will. What disposition we make of that we leave behind is a very serious act of our life; there are very few single acts so serious.

(1) It is usually a good thing for a man to dispose of a large proportion of all that he has earned during his life when he is here to superintend it.

(2) It is criminally careless to cause additional sorrow at death by negligence in the matter of disposition of means.

(3) The kindest thing we can do for our relatives is not to provide absolutely for their wants, but to facilitate their own self-support.

2. Wise counsels to those who will heed them. There are usually those who will pay Meat regard to the wishes of the dying, apart from any “legal instructions.” We may leave with those we love such recommendations as shall save them from grave mistakes, and guide them to good and happy courses.

3. A valued testimony to the power and preciousness of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

III. WHAT WE MAY TAKE WITH US.

1. Our faith in Jesus Christ; that settled attitude of the soul toward him which is one of trustfulness and love, which determines our place in the kingdom of God (Joh 3:15, Joh 3:16, Joh 3:18, Joh 3:36).

2. Our Christian lifeits record in the heavenly chronicles; that Christian service which, in its faithfulness-or its imperfection, will gain for us the larger or the smaller measure of our Lord’s approval (Luk 19:16-19).

3. Qualification, gained by steadfastness, patience, zeal, for the sphere which “the righteous Judge” will award us and will have ready for us.C.

HOMILIES BY J. WILLCOCK

Est 5:1

Vanity in religion: 1. Thoughtlessness.

From secular life the Preacher turns to religious. He has sought in many quarters for peace and satisfaction, but has found none. Royal palaces, huts where poor men lie, cells of philosophers, banqueting-halls, are all alike, if not all equally, infested by vanities which poison pleasure and add to the burden of care. But surely in the house of God, where men seek to disengage their thoughts from things that are seen and temporal, and to fix them upon things that are unseen and eternal, where they endeavor to establish and maintain communion with their Creator, one may count upon finding a haven of refuge for the soul from vanity and care. But here, too, he perceives that, by thoughtlessness, formalism, and insincerity, the purpose for which worship was instituted, and the blessings it may secure, are in danger of being defeated and nullified. But a change is manifest in the tone in which he reproves these faults. He lays down the whip of the satirist, he suppresses the fierce indignation which the sight of these new follies might have excited within him, and with sober earnestness exhorts his hearers to forsake the faults which separate between them and God, and hinder the ascent of their prayers to him and. the descent of his blessings upon them. His feelings of reverence, and his conviction that in obedience to God and in communion with him peace and satisfaction may be found, forbid his saying of genuine religion that it is “vanity and vexation of spirit.” So far as the spirit of his exhortation is concerned, it is applicable to all forms of worship, but we find some difficulty in ascertaining the kind of scene which was in his mind’s eye when he spoke of “the house of God.” If we are convinced that it is Solomon speaking in his own person, we know that he must refer to the stately building which he erected for the service of God in Jerusalem; and we understand from his words that he is not depreciating the offering of sacrifices, but is giving the admonition so often on the lips of the prophets, that the external act without accompanying devotion and love of righteousness, is in vain. But if we have here the utterance of a later writer, may there not be a reference to the synagogue service, in which the reading of the Word of God and exposition of its meaning were the principal religious exercises employed? May not the writer be understood as affirming “that a diligent listening to the teaching imparted in the synagogue is of more real value than the ‘sacrifices’ offered up in the temple by ‘fools'”? The answer we give is determined by the opinion we form as to the date of the book. But even if we are unable to decide this point, the exhortation before us will lose none of its significance and weight. The underlying truth is the same, whether the primary reference be to the gorgeous ritual of the temple, or to the simple, unadorned services of the synagogue, which in later times furnished the pattern for Christian worship. The first fault against which the Preacher would have his hearers be on their guard is that of thoughtlessnessentering the house of God inconsiderately (Est 5:1). The form in which the admonition is expressed is probably intended to remind his readers of the Divine command to Moses in the desert when he drew near to the bush that burned with fire: “Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground” (Exo 3:5; cf. also Jos 5:15).

I. Our first duty in entering the house of God is, therefore, TO BE REVERENT BOTH IN MANNER AND IN SPIRIT. The outward expression of this feeling, whatever form, according to the custom of our time, or country, or Church, it may take, is to be an indication of the frame of mind in which we enter upon the service of God. It is true that there may be a reverent manner without devoutness of spirit, but it is equally true that there cannot be devoutness of spirit without reverence of manner. The true frame of mind is that which springs from a due sense of the solemnity attaching to the house of God, and of the purpose for which we assemble in it. It is not superstition, but genuine religious sentiment, that would lead us to be mindful of the fact that it is no common ground which is enclosed by the sacred walls; that it is here that we meet with him whom “the heaven of heavens cannot contain.” Though we are at all times in his presence, his house is the place in which we entreat him to manifest himself to his congregated people. Yet, though we know that- the place and the purpose of our frequenting it are of the most holy and solemn nature, it is only by a strong effort that we can maintain the frame of mind we should be in when we wait upon God in his house. It is only by resolutely determining so to do that we can control our wandering thoughts, suppress frivolous and sinful imaginations, and divest ourselves of the secular cares and anxieties which occupy only too much of our attention in the world outside the sanctuary.

II. Our second great duty is THAT OF OBEDIENCE TO THE DIVINE LAW; “for to draw near to hearken is better than to give the sacrifice of fools, for they know not that they do evil” (Revised Version). Not only should there be reverence of manner and spirit in the presence of God, but a desire to know what he requires from us, and a disposition to render it. Love of holiness, and endeavors to exemplify it, are essential to all true service of God. By hearkening is evidently meant an attitude of mind which leads directly to obedience to the words spoken, to repentance and amendment when faults are reproved, and to a love and practice of the virtues commended. In the Epistle of James (1. 19-25) we have an inspired commentary upon this precept in the Book of ‘Ecclesiastes. The Christian teacher enforces the same lesson, and depicts the contrast between the “forgetful hearer” and the'” doer of the Word.” The one is like a man looking for a moment into a mirror, and going on his way, and speedily forgetting what he looked like; the other is like a man who uses the revelation the mirror gives him of himself, to correct what in him is faulty. The latter returns again and again to examine himself in the faithful glass, for the purpose of removing those stains which it may show are upon him. This reverence of manner and spirit and this love of righteousness alone give value to worship; omission of them through thoughtlessness is a positive offence against God.J.W.

Est 5:2, Est 5:3

Vanity in religion: 2. Rash prayers.

From an admonition as to the spirit in which we should enter the house of God, our author proceeds to counsel us as to the religious exercises we engage in there. Our utterances in prayer are to be calm and deliberate. A multitude of wishes may fill our hearts, and, unless we take care, find expression in a volume of ill-considered words. But we are to remember that only some of our wishes can be lawfully turned into prayers, and that an appropriate expression of the requests we feel we can offer, is due from us. The counsel here given is twofold:

(1) it relates to our words, which often outrun our thoughts, and

(2) to our hearts or minds, which are often the homes of vain imaginations and desires. Over both we must exercise control if we are to offer acceptable prayers. One great safeguard against offending in this matter is brevity in our addresses to heaven’s King. In a multitude of words even the wisest are in danger of giving indications of folly. Definite petitions, duly weighed, and expressed in simple, earnest language, become us who stand at such a distance from the throne of God. Our Lord reiterates the admonition in the sermon on the mount (Mat 6:7, Mat 6:8): “When ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.” And in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican (Luk 18:9-14) he contrasts the voluble utterance of the self-righteous and complacent worshipper with the brief, sincere confession and supplication of the true penitent. The greatest of all safeguards against the evil here condemned consists in our having before our minds a true idea of what prayer is. It is our offering petitions to God. as creatures who are dependent upon his goodness, as children whom he loves. If we take as our example that offered by our Savior in the garden of Gethsemane (Mat 26:39), we learn that the aim of prayer is not to determine the will of God. Some one thing we may ask for, but we leave it to God to grant or to deny, and seek above all that our will may be changed into his will (see Robertson of Brighton, vol. 4. serm. 3, “Prayer”).J.W.

Est 5:4-7

Vanity in religion: 3. Broken vows.

A vow is a promise to dedicate something to God, on certain conditions, such as his granting deliverance from death or danger, success in one’s undertakings, or the like, and is one of the most ancient and widespread of religious customs. The earliest we read of is that of Jacob at Bethel (Gen 28:18-22; Gen 31:13). The Mosaic Law regulated the practice, and the passage before us is an almost exact reproduction of the section in Deuteronomy (Deu 23:21-23) in which general directions are given about the discharge of such obligations. The vow consisted in the dedication of persons or possessions to sacred uses. The worshipper’s self, or child, or slave, or property, might be devoted to God. Vows were entirely voluntary, but, once made, were regarded as compulsory, and evasion of performance of them was held to be highly irreligious (Num 30:2; Deu 23:21-23; Ecc 5:4). The kind of sin referred to here is that of making a vow inconsiderately, and drawing back when the time of performance comes. No obligation to vow rested upon any man (Deu 23:22), but when the vow had once been made, no one could without dishonor refuse to fulfill it. Of course, it was to be taken for granted that the vow was such as could be fulfilled without violating any law or ordinance of God. And, accordingly, provision was made in the Mosaic Law for the canceling of any such obligation undertaken inadvertently, and found on maturer consideration to be immoral. It could be set aside, and the offence of having made it be atoned for as a sin of ignorance (Le Deu 5:4-6). But when no such obstacle stood in the way of performance, nothing but a prompt and cheerful fulfillment of the vow could be accepted as satisfactory. A twofold fault is described in the passage before us:

(1) an unseemly delay in fulfilling the vow (verse 4) leading, perhaps, to an omission to fulfil it .at all; and

(2) a deliberate evasion of it, the insincere worshipper going to the angel (priest), and saying that the vow had been made in ignorance, and should not therefore be kept literally (verse 6). And in correspondence with the respective degrees of guilt incurred by such conduct, the Divine indignation takes a less or more intense form: verse 4, “He hath no pleasure in fools;” verse 6, “Wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands?” The idea of the former of the two statements of the Divine displeasure is far from being trivial or from being a tame anticipation of the latter. “The Lord first ceases to delight in a man, and then, after long forbearance, gives him over to destruction” (Wright). The one great source of these three forms of evil which so often vitiate religious lifethoughtlessness, rash prayers, and broken vowsis irreverence, and against it the Preacher lifts up his voice (verse 7): “For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.” Just as occasional dreams may be coherent, so few well-considered utterances may be characterized by wisdom. But a crowd of dreams, and hasty, babbling speech, are sure to contain confused images and offensive folly. The fear of God, therefore, if it habitually influence the mind, will preserve a man from being “rash with his mouth;” it will hinder his making inconsiderate vows, and afterwards seeking excuses for not fulfilling them.J.W.

Est 5:8

A misgoverned state.

From the follies only too prevalent in the religious world, the Preacher turns to the disorders of the political; and although he admonishes his readers in a later section of the book (Ec very evident that he felt keenly the misery and oppression caused by misgovernment. For these evils he could suggest no cure; a hopeless submission to the inevitable is his only counsel. Like Hamlet, his heart is wrung by the thought of evils against which it was almost useless to strive

“The oppressor’s wrong,
the proud man’s contumely the law’s delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes.”

The subordinate magistrates tyrannized over the people, those who were higher in office watched their opportunity for oppressing them. From the lowest up to the very highest rank of officials the same system of violence and jealous espionage prevailed. Those that were in the royal household and had the ear of the king, his most intimate counselors, who were in a sense higher than any of the satraps or governors he employed, were able to urge him to use his power for the destruction of any whose ill-gotten riches made him an object of envy (romp. Ecc 10:4, Ecc 10:7, Ecc 10:16, etc.). The whole system of government was rotten to the core, the same distrust and jealousy pervaded every part of it. “Marvel not,” says the Preacher, “at oppression and injustice in the lower departments of official life, for those who are the superiors of the tyrannical judge or governor, and should be a check on him, are as bad as he.” Such seems to be the sense of the words. At first sight, indeed, the impression left on one’s mind is that the Preacher counsels his readers not to be perplexed or unduly dismayed at the wrong they are forced to witness, on the ground that over and above the highest of earthly tyrants is the power of God, and that it will in due time be manifested in the punishment of the evil-doer. As though he had said, God who is “higher than the highest regardeth,” beholds the wrong-doing; and when he comes to judgment, the proudest will have to submit to his power (comp. Ecc 3:17). But this interpretation, though very ancient, is not in harmony with the general character of the utterance. The thought of God’s power and justice is indeed calculated to give some consolation to the oppressed, but not to explain why they are oppressed. The latter part of the verse is assigned as a reason for not marveling at the prevalence of evil. If, therefore, reference be made to the power of God, by which the evil might be restrained or abolished, the marvel of its prevalence would only be increased. We are, therefore, to understand his words as meaning, “Do not be surprised at the corruption and baseness of the lower officials, in so much as the same corruption prevails among those in far higher positions.” He is not here seeking to cheer up the sufferer by bidding him look higher; he is describing the evil state of affairs everywhere existing in the empire in his own day (Wright). There is nothing very heroic or inspiring in the counsel. It is simply an admonition, based on prudence, to escape personal danger by stolidly submitting to evils which one’s own power can do nothing to abolish or alleviate. To those who under an Oriental despotism had become hopeless and dispirited, the words might seem worthy of a wise counselor; but surely there is a servile ring about them which ill harmonizes with the love of freedom and intolerance of tyranny which are native to a European mind. There is but one relieving circumstance in connection with them, and that is that submission to oppression is not commanded in them or asserted to be a duty; and therefore those in whose hearts the love of country and of justice burns brightly, and who find that a pure and devoted patriotism moves them to make many sacrifices for the good of their fellows, violate no canon of Scripture when they rise superior to the prudential considerations dwelt upon here. Granted that submission to the inevitable is the price at which material safety and happiness may be bought, it is still a question at many times whether the patriot should not hazard material safety and happiness in the attempt to win for his country and for himself a higher boon.J.W.

Est 5:9

A well-ordered state.

In contrast with the evils produced by an administration in which all the officials, from the lowest to the highest, seek to enrich themselves, our author now sets the picture of a well-governed community, in which the efficient cultivation of the land is a matter of the first consideration, and all classes of the population, up to the king himself, share in the consequent prosperity. (The verse has been differently rendered, but the translation of both our Revised and Authorized Versions is probably the best reproduction of the original words.) From the kings who wasted the resources of the lands over which they ruled in carrying on bloody wars, and in the indulgence of their capricious tastes, he turns to those who, like Uzziah, encouraged agriculture, and under whose beneficent rule Judah enjoyed the blessings of peace and prosperity (2Ch 26:10). “The profit of the earth is for all.” All are dependent upon the labors of the husbandman for the supply of the necessaries of life. By the judicious cultivation of the soil wealth is accumulated, by which comforts and luxuries are to be procured, so that even “the king himself is served by the field.” The king, indeed, is more dependent upon the husbandman than the husbandman upon the king; without his labors there would be no bread for the royal palace, and no luxuries could make up for the absence of this necessary of life. We have, surely, in this consideration a strong proof of the dignity and value of the humblest labor, and in the fact of the mutual dependence of all classes upon each other an argument for the necessity of mutual forbearance and co-operation. A very striking illustration of the teaching here given is afforded in an incident which took place at Heidelberg in the reign of Frederic I.. “This prince invited to a banquet all the factious barons whom he had vanquished at Seekingen, and who had previously ravaged and laid waste great part of the palatinate. Among them were the Bishop of Mentz and the Margrave of Baden. The repast was plentiful and luxurious, but there was no bread. The warrior-guests looked round with surprise and inquiry. ‘Do you ask for bread?’ said Frederic, sternly; ‘you who have wasted the fruits of the earth, and destroyed those whose industry cultivates it? There is no bread. Eat, and be satisfied; and learn henceforth mercy to those who put the bread into your mouths'” (quoted in ‘Sketches of Germany,’ by Mrs. Jameson).J.W.

Est 5:10 -20

The drawbacks upon wealth.

The series of aphorisms which begins in Est 5:10 is not unconnected with what precedes it. It is for wealth generally that the unjust judge and oppressive ruler barters his peace of mind, sells his very soul. As the means for procuring sensual gratification, for surrounding one’s self with ostentatious luxury, and for carrying out ambitious schemes, riches have great fascination. The Preacher, however, records at length the drawbacks connected with them, which are calculated to diminish the envy with which the poor very often regard those who possess them. Probably the bulk of mankind would say that they are willing to put up with the drawbacks if only they could possess the riches. But surely those who read the Word of God reverently and with a docile spirit are disposed to profit by the wise counsels and warning it contains. The gross and presumptuous frame of mind, which would lead any to laugh at the drawbacks upon wealth as imaginary, when compared with the happiness they think it must secure, deserves severe censure. Both rich and poor may draw appropriate lessons from the Preacher’s words: the rich may learn humility; the poor, contentment.

I. INSATIABLENESS OF AVARICE. (Est 5:10.) Those who begin to amass money cultivate an appetite which can never be satisfied, which only grows in fierceness as it is supplied with food. Those who love silver will never count themselves rich enough; they will always hunger for more, and the amount that would once have seemed abundance to them will be spurned as paltry, as their ideas and desires are enlarged. Dissatisfaction with what they have, and greed to acquire more, poison their pleasure in all that they have accumulated. Happy are those who have learned to be content with little, whose wants are few and moderate, who, having food and raiment, desire no morethey are really rich.

II. Another thought calculated to diminish envy of the rich is that, AS WEALTH INCREASES, THOSE THAT CONSUME IT INCREASE ALSO. (Est 5:11.) Along with the more abundant possessions, there is generally a larger retinue of servants and dependants. So that, with more to provide for, the wealthy man may be poorer than he was in earlier days when his means were smaller. Fresh demands are made upon him; the outward display he is forced to make becomes a daily increasing burden; he has to labor for the supply of others rather than for himself. A striking passage in Xenophonquoted by Plumptreexpresses the same thought. “Do you think that I live with more pleasure the more I possess? By having this abundance I gain merely this, that I have to guard more, to distribute more to others, and to have the trouble of taking care of more; for a great many domestics now demand of me their food, their drink, and their clothes . Whosoever, therefore, is greatly pleased with the possession of riches will, be assured, feel much annoyed at the expenditure of them” (‘Cyrop.,’ Est 8:3). The only compensation that the rich man may have is that of being able to look on his treasures and say, “These are mine.” Is it, after all, a sufficient reward for his toils and cares?

III. Another boon which the poor may always enjoy, but which the rich may often sigh for in vain, is SWEET SLEEP. (Est 5:12.) The laborer enjoys refreshing sleep, whether his food be abundant or not; the toils of the day ensure sound slumber at night. While the very abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep; all kinds of cares, projects, and anxieties rise within his mind, and will not suffer him to be at rest. The dread of losing his riches may make him wakeful, feverish excitement may result from his luxurious mode of living, and rob him of the power to compose himself to slumber, and, like the ambitious king, he may envy the ship-boy rocked and lulled by the tossing of “the rude, imperious surge” (Shakespeare, ‘Henry IV.,’ Part II; act 3. sc. 1).

IV. RICHES MAY INJURE ITS POSSESSOR. (Est 5:13.) It may mark him out as a suitable victim for spoliation by a lawless tyrant or a revolutionary mob. Or it may furnish him with the means of indulging vicious appetites, and increase greatly the risks and temptations that make it difficult to live a sober, righteous, and godly life, and ruin him body and soul. As says the apostle, “They that desire to be rich fall into a temptation and a snare, and many foolish and hurtful lusts, such as drown men in destruction and perdition” (1Ti 6:9, 1Ti 6:10).

V. Another evil attendant on wealth is THE DANGER OF SUDDEN AND IRRETRIEVABLE LOSS. (Est 5:14.) “Not only do riches fail to give any satisfying joy, but the man who reckoned on founding a family, and leaving his heaped-up treasures to his son, gains nothing but anxieties and cares, he may lose his wealth by some unfortunate chance, and leave his son a pauper.” The case of Job would seem to be in the writer’s mind as an example of this sudden downfall from prosperity and wealth. In any case, death robs the rich man of all his possessions; in the twinkling of an eye he is stripped of his wealth, as a traveler who has fallen in with a troop of banditti, and is forced to depart from life as poor in goals as when he entered it (verses 15, 16).

VI. Lastly, come THE INFIRMITY AND PEEVISHNESS WHICH ARE OFTEN THE COMPANIONS OF WEALTH. (Verse: 17.) Riches cannot cure disease, or ward off the day of death, or compensate for the sorrows and disappointments of life, and may only tend to aggravate them; a deeper dissatisfaction with self, and with the providential government of the world, a more intense feeling of misanthropy and embitterment are likely to be the portion of the godless rich than of those who have had all through life to labor for their bread, and have never risen much above the position in which they first found themselves. As a practical conclusion, the Preacher reiterates for the fourth time his old advice (verses 18-20): “It’ you have little, be content with it. If you have much, enjoy it without excess, and without seeking more. God gives life and earthly blessings, and the power to enjoy them.” And in words that are less clear than we could wish, he seems to intimate that in this pious disposition of mind and heart will be found the secret of a serene and happy life, which no changes or disappointments will be able wholly to overcast. “For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answereth him in the joy of his heart “words which seem to imply, “The man who has learned the secret of enjoyment is not anxious about the days of his life; does not brood even over its transitoriness, but takes each day tranquilly as it comes, as God’s gift to him; and God himself corresponds to his joy, is felt to approve it, as harmonizing, in its calm evenness, with his own blessedness. The tranquility of the wise man mirrors the tranquility of God” (Plumptre).J.W.

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Ecc 5:1. And be more ready to hear, &c. For, to be ready to obey is a better sacrifice than the gift of fools; because they know not when they do evil. It is plain that Solomon intended to oppose the course which he advises us to take when we go into the house of God, to that which is generally pursued by fools, or those who are ignorant of divine knowledge: but the beauty of that opposition is almost entirely lost in modern versions, through the turn given to the whole sentence. By means of the translation here offered, two sorts of sacrifices are distinctly opposed to each other; namely, a sacrifice of obedience, wherein the most essential part of the wise man’s worship consists; and a sacrifice of oblations, wherewith the ignorant foolishly imagines he can render to God all that he owes him. The paranomasia in the original might, perhaps, be thus preserved in our language; “An offering of obedience is a sacrifice preferable to the gift of fools.” The particulars hitherto alleged in support of the main argument may be viewed in very different lights, as appears by the apprehensions of those who would exclude this book from the canon: though they are really calculated to instil the fear of God, and a thorough reverence of him into men’s hearts; yet some might imagine that they are apt to produce an effect directly contrary to that respect and reverence which we owe to the Almighty: the sacred orator, being aware of this, thought proper here to insert a few admonitions concerning that respect and reverence. I. Though some may be apt to infer from the obvious vanity of every thing in this world, that God does not concern himself about human affairs; yet never go into his house only for form’s sake. II. When you resort thither, be mindful of your duty to him; and remember, that such a continual watchfulness over yourself as the ignorant and giddy are not capable of, is more acceptable to him than any form of outward worship.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

C. Means for the Advancement of Earthly Happiness

Ecc 5:1-20

1. First means: Conscientious devotion in the worship of God, in prayer and vows

(Ecc 5:1-7.)

1Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools; for they consider not that they do evil. 2Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few. 3for a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fools voice is known by multitude of words. 4When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; 5for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. 6Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands? 7for in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.

2. Second means: Abstaining from injustice, violence, and avarice

(Ecc 5:8-17.)

8If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not at the matter: for he that is higher than the highest 9regardeth; and there be higher than they. Moreover, the profit of the earth is for all: the king himself is served by the field. 10He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase: this is also vanity . 11When goods increase, they are increased that eat them: and what good is there to the owners thereof, saving the beholding of them with their eyes? 12The sleep of a labouring man is sweet, whether he eat little or much: but the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep. 13There is a sore evil which I have seen under the sun, namely, riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt. 14But those riches perish by evil travail: and he begetteth a son, and there is nothing in his hand. 15As he came forth of his mothers womb, naked shall he return to go as he came, and shall take nothing of his labour, which he may carry away in his hand. 16And this also is a sore evil, that in all points as he came, so shall he go: and what profit hath he that he hath laboured for the wind? 17All his days also he eateth in darkness, and he hath much sorrow and wrath with his sickness.

3. Third means: Temperate and contented enjoyment of the pleasures and treasures of life granted by God

(Ecc 5:18-20.)

18Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely for one to eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labour that he taketh under the sun all the days of his life, which God giveth him: for it is his portion. 19Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth, and hath given him power to eat thereof, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labour; this is the gift of God. 20For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answereth him in the joy of his heart.

[chap.Ecc 5:1. in the Hebrew Bibles, the German and Dutch versions, the Vulgate, and some others, this is absurdly placed as the last verse of the 4. chapter. In the English, Tremellius, and others, it commences the 5., where it evidently belongs; although the division of chapters, as given in this book is, in any way, of little valne. The Masora has pointed for the singular, corresponding to LXX and vulgate, though the sense is equally good in the plural. For the connection of this part with the precending, consult Wordsworth, who sees in the train of though, in all these remarks about reshness in the divine service, and in respect to vows and rash religious speaking, smothing closely connected with the true Solomonic experience, and therefore furnising evidence of the solomonic authorship of the book. As uttered by any one else, it would seem disconnected and chaotic, just as some critics have pronounced it. For remarks on and see Exeg. and Marginal Note.T. L.]

[Ecc 5:6. for , Hiph. Infinit. see Exeg. and Marginal Note.T. L.]

[Ecc 5:7. , the same.T. L.]

[Ecc 5:8. , a very general and indefinite word, hero rendered, in E.G., matter (thing),LXX. , Vulgate negotio. It never, however, loses its sense of purpose, will, etc., either as positive or permissive,as it may be rendered here, allow ance Gods permission of such a thing: see Met. Version.T. L.]

[Ecc 5:9. . see Exeg. and Marg. Note.T. L.]

[Ecc 5:10. : The Keri has , It is one of those words in that have been cited as evidence of a later language. It is, however, one of those more studied solomonic words, denoting something philosophical, ethical, or abstract, denanded by the very subject and style of his writting. They are a higher class of words than were needed by the plainer historian, or prophet. They may have been invented by solomon as to form (from old and common roots), and afterwards have become vulgarized in the latter writtingsthus giving rise to the later Aramaic forms, instead of having been derived from them: Vision of the eyes, a somewhat more polished, or loftier word, than the infinitive to see, or Sight.T. L.]

Ecc 5:16. : Gesenius makes from to be sick, weak, etc., but this does not seem to give a sense strong enough. Rabbi Tanchum makes it from , to be in great pain, torqueri doloribus, and compares it with the participle (Jer 23:19,) overwhelming, or a storm hurled () on the head of the wickeda very sore and overwhelming evil, is this, if man has to return just as he came, e tenebris in tenebras, out of darkness. see Tanchum Comm., Lam 4:6 Same verse The grammarian, Jona Ben Gennach, in his sepher Harikma, p. 30, regards this as one word, or as an example of added (as it sometimes is with slight addition to the meaning) to , (as in direct contrast). is cited as one of the words Sequioris Hebraismi, but the root

although, only occurring as a verb, Eze 28:3; Eze 31:8, is very old in the language, as appears from people, the preposition with, society, companion, all denoting, radically, comparison, one thing along with, or laid by the side of another (compare the Arabic and many Greek words commencing with such as , , , , with their numerous derivatives, all implying comparison, society, likeness, etc.). This word occurs in Exo 25:27; Exo 28:27.

Ecc 5:18. : [On the effect of the accent here see Exeg. and Marg. Note. The same on Ecc 5:19.T. L]

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Of the three divisions of this section, the first two are divided each into two strophes of about equal length, and each of the two strophes of the second division, being very full in sense and rich in clauses, is again divided into two half strophes. The third division consists of only one not very comprehensive strophe. The complete scheme of the section stands, therefore, thus:I. Division: Of true piety; a. (1 strophe): in worship and prayer, Ecc 5:1-3; b. (2 strophe): of vowing and the fulfilment of vows: Ecc 5:4-7.II. Division: On avoiding various vices; a, (1 half strophe): of injustice and violence: Ecc 5:8-9; b, (Ecc 5:3-5, half-strophe): of avarice: Ecc 5:10-17.III, Division: Of the temperate and thankfully contented enjoyment of life: Ecc 5:18-20, strophe 5.Vaihinger combines Ecc 5:8-12, and then Ecc 5:13-20, each as a principal division or strophe, and overlooks the fact that the theme of avarice does not begin at Ecc 5:13, but at Ecc 5:10 (consequently with the first half strophe of strophe 3d, comprising Ecc 5:8-12), and that, therefore, with verse 18, introduced by the words , begins an entirely new series of thoughts, which bears a concluding relation to the main contents of the chapter.

2. First division, first strophe: Ecc 5:1-3. Of true piety in, the worship of God, and in prayer.Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God. The ktib is to be preferred to the keri . The latter appears to be modeled according to the passages in Pro 4:26; Pro 25:17, and others, which present foot in the singular. For feet in the plural in similar expressions comp. Pro 1:16; Pro 6:18; Psa 119:59, etc. The sense of this exhortation is: guard thy steps when thou goest to the house of the Lord, that thou mayest enter it with sacred composure, and carefully avoid everything that would interfere with thy devotion. See Hengstenberg: The object is to preserve the heart, but as he goes, the heart receives its impressions, and is thus affected by it. The author doubtless speak of the feet because by them has often been discovered the tendency of the heart. And be more ready to hear, etc. (Ger., to approach in order to hear is better). The preposition , without , may in itself express the preference of one thing over another; comp. Ecc 9:17; Isa 10:10; Eze 15:2.1 is not here for the imperative be near, (Luther, Hengstenberg, etc.), but is an actual infinitive absolute, and as such subject of the sentence; comp. Pro 25:27; Isa 7:15-16. To hear does not mean to listen to the reading of the Thora during the service, (Hitzig) but to obey, to regard the voice of God with the heart, to do His will; comp. 1Sa 15:22; Jer 7:23. We have here the same contrast between external sacrifice and holy intent as in Pro 21:3; Pro 21:27; Isa 1:11 ft.; Hos 6:6, etc.Than to give the sacrifice of fools. This sacrifice () is specially pointed out from among the number of sacrifices, as also in Psa 40:6; Hos 6:6; 1Sa 15:22. To give the sacrifice, does not mean to give a sacrificial feast, (Hitzig), but to offer a sacrifice to God in order to satisfy him, or in order to appease ones conscience.For they consider not that they do evil. Fools, whose sacrifice is an offence to God on account of their evil dispositions (comp. Pro 21:27; and also the exegetical illustrations of this passage) do evil in sacrificing to Him, and nevertheless know it not, but rather suppose, in their folly, that their conduct is well pleasing to Him. As this thought (comp. Luk 23:34) exactly fits the passage, and there is no linguistic difficulty in the explanation (for the construction , they know not that they do evil, comp. Jer 15:15; 1Ki 19:4; Neh 13:27) the renderings of the passage that vary from this are to be condemned. They are such as that of Hahn, (and many older commentators): in their ignorance they can only do evil, or of Knobel and Vaihinger: They are not troubled about doing evil, or of Hitzig; For they know not how to be sorrowful (for which sense reference is made to 2Sa 12:18; Isa 56:12, etc.). The nearest to our view is that of the Vulgate, and of Luther: for they know not what evil they do, which, however, cannot be philologically justified. Ecc 5:2. Be not rash with thy mouth. This censure of outward sacrifice is immediately followed by that of thoughtless words, and empty babbling in prayer, the next important element of divine worship in the temple. To be rash with thy mouth is essentially the same as that against which Christ warns us, perhaps with conscious reference to this passage, Mat 6:7, f.And let not thine heart be hasty to utter anything before God. Before God, i.e., in the temple, in the place of the special presence of God, comp. Psa 42:2; Isa 1:12. This warning against rash, thoughtless, and unnecessary words in prayer, is as little in contradiction with apostolic directions as found in 1Th 5:17; Col 3:17; Php 4:6, as is the warning of Christ against idle words, at war with His own repeated admonitions to zealous and continuous prayer, e.g., Luk 11:5 ff; Luk 18:1, ff.; Joh 14:13; Joh 16:23, etc.For God is in heaven, and thou upon the earth. The majesty of God, in contrast with the lowliness of men, is here made clear by the contra-position of heaven and earth, as in Psa 115:3; Psa 115:16; Isa 55:7 ff; Isa 66:1; Mat 5:34, f.

Ecc 5:3. For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fools voice is known by a multitude of words. That is, just as a too continued, exciting, and anxious occupation of the mind () produces the phenomenon of confused and uneasy dreams, by which the sleep is disturbed, so the habit of an excess of words, causes the speech to degenerate into vain and senseless twaddle. The first clause of the verse serves solely as an illustration of the second; the comparison, as in Ecc 7:1; Pro 17:3; Pro 27:21; Job 5:7, etc., is effected by simply placing the sentences in juxtaposition, merely putting the copulative conjunction before the second (comp. the Int. to Proverbs, 14 p. 32). Ewald assumes a continuous train of thought, asserting that from too much annoyance come dreams, from these, all kinds of vain and superfluous words, and, finally, from these, foolish speech; but this is decidedly opposed to the fact that is necessarily to be understood as a designation of the actual dream, not of a dreamy, thoughtless nature, and that the derivation of a wordy nature from the latter would be in violation of all psychological experience.

3. First Division, second strophe.

Vers, 47. Of pious conscientiousness in vowing and the fulfilment of vows. For Ecc 5:4-5 see Deu 23:22-24, whose ordinances are here almost literally repeated.For he hath no pleasure in fools. are frivolous men, who are equally ready to make vows of every kind, but then delay their performance from indolence or selfishness. Of them it is said: there is no pleasure in them, namely, with God; for the context obliges us thus to finish the thought,

Ecc 5:5. Better is it that thou shouldst not vow, than, etc..Comp. Deu 23:22 : But if thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee; also Act 5:4. Ecc 5:6. Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin. here marks the body as the seat of desire, therefore of sensuality and fleshly sense in general, as the New Testament ; Ecc 2:3 is also similar to this. The description of James, in Ecc 3:6 f. of his Epistle, gives a clear testimony that the sensuality of man is sinfully excited by the sins of the tongue, or the mouth, and can be enkindled by the fire of evil passion; and Hengstenberg should not have quoted this passage as a proof of his position that flesh here signifies the entire personality. Hitzig translates: Let not thy mouth bring thy body to punishment, but fails to give the proof for the possibility of the rendering of in the sense of bringing to punishment, atoning for.Neither say thou before the angel that it was an error.[Zckler here renders messenger, to accommodate to his exegesis.T. L.]. , Messenger, i.e., Jehovahs [Comp. Hag 1:13; Mal 1:3], is here the designation of the priest2 or announcer and expounder of the divine law; comp. Mal 2:7, the only passage of the O. T. where this expression is used of the priest; and see also in the N. T. Rev 1:20; Rev 2:1 ff., where is used essentially in the same sense. That it was an error [ as in Num 15:27 ff.] is the characteristic evasion of religious superficiality and levity, which seek to excuse unfulfilled vows by declaring the neglect of them a mere error or precipitation [an unintentional error]; cornp. Mal 1:8; Mat 15:5, etc. Hitzig: it was a thoughtlessness,that is, that I made the vow at all. But a vow solemnly declared before the priest could not thus be recalled without further ceremony by declaring that it was vowed in a, thoughtless manner. The thoughtless delinquent will wish to represent the evasion of its fulfilment as simply a sin of weakness or precipitation, whilst it is in reality a crime of a very serious character [comp. Elstee and Hengsten-beeg on this passage].Why should God be angry at thy voice [which thou dost misuse in a vile, sophistical and God-tempting evasion] and destroy the work of thy handsthat is, punish thee, therefore, by a failure of all thy undertakings, and destruction of all treasures and goods? For the warning sense of the question with comp. Ecc 7:16-17; Psa 90:17; 2 Chron. 10:37; Ezr 4:22; Ezr 7:23. Verse 7. For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities. Just as in verse 3, dreams are here also to be taken only as examples of the vanity of making many word, and of its bad consequences. As we can reasonably conclude that one who has much to do with dreams [comp. Jer 23:33; Zec 10:1] is an unreliable man, little fitted for the duties and aflairs of sober reality, therefore the wordiest babbler will inspire in us the least confidence. Ewald and Heiligstedts view: for in too many dreams are too many vanities and words, is opposed by the connection, which shows that no information is to be imparted here concerning the nature and signification of dreams, and then also the circumstance that it is not very clearly to be seen in how far dreams may cause much useless prattle.But fear thou God, so that thou dost really try to fulfill what thou hast vowed to Him. , because co-ordinate with the preceding, is to bo translated by but, and not thus; for it expresses in a conclusive manner the contrast to verse 6.3

4. Second Division, first strophe, a: Ecc 5:8-9.On avoiding injustice and violenceIf thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province. Comp. Ecc 3:16; Ecc 4:1, ff. (Ger., robbery of judgment and justice). This is a robbery committed against these objective and divine laws, a violation of them by exactions, and other violence. Such violations of judgment are most likely to be practiced in the provinces, far from the seat of the king and the highest courts, by governors and generals. Therefore here , by which is doubtless meant the province in which the author lives, that is, Palestine. Comp. Ezr 5:8; Neh 1:3; Neh 7:6; Neh 11:3, and also the Int. 4, Obs. 2.Marvel not at the matter. [Comp. Ecc 3:1], is neither absolutely the same as cause, matter, [Hitzig] nor does it indicate the divine pleasure, the execution of divine decrees, (as Hengstenberg). It is rather the violent doing of the thieving officials that is meant, the such is my pleasure, of rulers, who usually commence their edicts with these words: it seems good to me, it is good in presence of the king, Dan 3:22; Dan 6:2; Dan 4:22; Eze 5:17. (Hengstenberg). For the exhortation not to marvel at such things, not to be surprised, comp. 1Pe 4:12 : . . .For he that is higher than the highest regardeth; and there be higher than they. That is, over the lofty oppressor stands a still higher ruler, the king; and even over him, should he not aid suffering innocence in its rights, is a still higher one, the King of kings, and Supremo Judge of the world. is, as it were, a plural of majesty,4 serving for a most emphatic designation of the fulness of eternal power in the Godhead; it is the same construction as , Creator, Ecc 12:1; Pro 9:10; Pro 30:8; Hos 12:1. , Dan 7:18; Dan 7:22, etc. Comp. Ewald, 178 b. We cannot let this expression refer to the king as the highest earthly judge and potentate, on account of its analogy with other plural names of Deity. It is extremely unfitting, indeed almost absurd, to refer the second high one to a supreme judge, and the to the governor (Hitzig). For a poor consolation would be offered to the oppressed by a reference merely to these courts, as certain as that one crow does not pick out the eyes of another, (a very poorly sustained proverb, quoted by Hitzig himself). Ecc 5:9. Moreover, the profit of the earth is for all; the king himself is served by the field. That is, notwithstanding that God alone rules as highest judge and avenger over all the destinies of men, we are not to despise the protection and safety which an earthly authority affords, especially a strong kingly government, that can protect the fields from devastation, and their boundaries from intrusion. [so is it to be read, as in the Ktib, instead of ] is of like meaning with , in all thisor notwithstanding all this, as it is Isa 9:11. The concluding words can neither mean: a king honored by the land (Knobel and Vaihinger), nor: a king honored throughout the whole land (Hahn), nor: a king to till the field (Luther, Starke, etc.), nor: a king subject to the field (Herzfeld), nor: rex agro addictus, (Rosenmueller, Dathe, etc.), nor: a king to the tilled field, namely, a profit and advantage to it, (Hitzig, Hengstenberg, comp. also the Sept.). is here used -rather in the sense of made, installed, placed, in accordance with the Chaldaio signification of =, Dan 3:1; Dan 3:15; Dan 3:29; Dan 7:21; Ezr 4:19, etc., and , field, is a poetical synonym of (Comp. Gen 2:5; Gen 4:7; Rth 1:6), here undoubtedly chosen because agriculture, this principal occupation of the provinces (comp. Ecc 2:8) can only prosper through the protection and propitious influence of the king. Compare the very close connection in which the religion of the Chinese, Persians, Egyptians, and Romans placed the royal office with agriculture. It does not militate against the view sustained by us that there is no definite article before . Comp. Ewald. 277, b; and quite as little does this view disagree with the verbal collocation, as will be seen by comparing Ecc 9:2; Isa 42:24; Dan 6:8.5

5. Second Division, first strophe b, and second strophe a. b: Ecc 5:10-17. On avoiding avarice and covetousness.As in Deu 16:19; Amo 8:4 ff.; Pro 15:25-27; Sir 10:8, so we have here the condemnation of the coarser form of covetousness, which does not shun open injustice and violence, and, directly afterwards, that of the love of money and desire of gain operating with more delicate, more genteel, and apparently more just means.He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver, i. e., not satisfied in mind, and consequently not happy. Comp. the Horatian line: Semper avarus eyet (Ep. I, Ecc 2:20); also Ovid Fast. I, 211 S.:

Creverunt et opes et opum furiosa cupido;

Et cum posideant plurima plura volunt

Nor he that loveth abundance with increase. Lit.,loveth tumult; in other places, noise, turmoil of a great multitude of people, here means, as in Psa 37:16, the multitude of possessions; and means as elsewhere

Ecc 5:11. When goods increase, they are increased that eat them. Lit. their eaters, their consumers. The meaning here is clearly the numerous servants of a rich household. Comp. Job 1:3; 1Ki 5:2, if.And what good is there to the owners thereof ? here, fortune, gain, different from Ecc 2:21; Ecc 4:4. The plural has here a singular meaning, as in Ecc 5:12; Ecc 7:11; Ecc 8:8; Pro 3:27.Save the beholding of them with their eyes, i.e., only the empty, not really satisfying feeling of pleasure at the sight of heaped-up treasures. In place of read with, the Keri.

Ecc 5:12. The sleep of a laboring man is sweet, whether he eat little or much; i. e., whether he enjoys a generous food, or must be satisfied with a scanty nourishment. laborer is different from slave, and also from serf; it means in general every one, who according to divine direction in Gen 3:19; Exo 20:9, must earn his bread in the sweat of his brow, be he vassal or freeman.But the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep. Hieronymus justly says: incocto cibo in stomachi augustiis estuante. , a paraphrase for the genitive like 1Sa 14:18, etc.; comp. Ewald, 292, a.For this sentence comp. Horace, Sat. I., 1, 76 ss.; Juvenal, Sat. X., 12 s.; XIV., 304; also Publ. Syrus: Avarum irritat non satiat pecunia.

Ecc 5:13-17. Second strophe: The annoying and inconstant nature of wealth. There is a sore evil; lit., a painful evil; equivalent to the participle Neph 6 Jer 14:17; Nah 3:19.Riches kept for the owners thereof to their hurt. Carefully guarded wealth proves a misfortune to the possessor when the latter loses this transitory and unreliable possession, and becomes, thereby, more unhappy than if he had never possessed it. The only correct illustration of this thought is afforded by Ecc 5:14. Ecc 5:14. But these riches perish by evil travail., lit., annoyance, hardship, as in Ecc 1:13; Ecc 4:8, does not here mean the unprofitable business, the unfortunate administration of the affairs of the rich, but any misfortune, an evil occurrence of the nature of those in Job 1:14-19, caused by robbers, tempests, storms, etc.7And he begetteth a son, and there, is nothing in his hand. is correctly taken as a preterit in the Sept., Vulg., and Syriac; for after the failure of his means, he who was rich leaves off begetting sons.

Ecc 5:15. As he came forth of his mothers womb, naked shall he return to go as he came. , lit., he repeats his going, i.e., he goes away again, namely out of this life. We find the same reflection concerning the inexorable operation of death in Job 1:21; Psa 49:10; 1Ti 6:7, and also in the classics, e.g., Propert, Carm. III., 3, 35 s.:

Haud ullas portabis opes Acherontis ad undas;
Nudus ad inferna stulte, vehere rate!

Comp. P. Gerhard in the hymn: Why should I then grieve ?

Naked lay I on the earth,
When I came, when I drew
At first my breath.
Naked shall I pass away,
When from earth again I flee,
Like a shadow.

And shall take nothing of his labor. Lit., does he lift up through his labor; as in Psa 24:4.Which he may carry away in his hand. is optative Hophil [=, Mic 3:4; Mic 6:13, etc.], and need not be changed into , as Hitzig does in accordance with the Sept. and Symmachus. For the thought that a rich man at his death can take none of his treasures with him, is extremely fitting here, in case one does not think of the rich man described in Ecc 5:14, who, previously to his death, was bereft of all his possessions by misfortune. And this is so much the less necessary, since before this verse death has not been considered the final end of all wealth and desire of acquiring it.

Ecc 5:16 emphatically repeats the thought of the preceding verse, in order to show more strongly the entire fruitlessness and folly of toiling after earthly wealth, and to prepare for the closing description in Ecc 5:17 of the tortured existence of a rich miser.And this is also a sore evil, namely, not simply that named in Ecc 5:13, but also that added in Ecc 5:15; consequently not merely the there described (1Ti 6:17), but also death, that places an unconditional limit to all wealth, and toiling after riches. The views of Hengstenberg, Vaihinger, etc., are correct, whilst Hitzig wrongfully supposed that the second: sore evil is not named until the last clause of this verse, and that it consists in the miserable existence of the miser, full of vexation and profitless. This having no profit, and laboring for the wind, coincides rather (like the contents of Ecc 5:17) with the vanity of this world, and its inconstancy and hardship, as described in Ecc 5:13-14, so that the reflection at its end again leads back to its beginning. Ecc 5:17. All his days also he eateth in darkness, that is, in a gloomy, peevish state of mind, in subjective darkness as described in Mat 6:23; Joh 11:10. can be very easily taken as the object of , although the phrase eateth his days does not appear again,8 and therefore the meaning of all his days seems the more likely to be merely used as defining the time; but comp. for this view the instances at least approximately analogous in Job 21:13; Job 36:11. The Sept. seems to have read instead of and so in the following clause, instead of they must have read , and for they must have read ; for they translate: . Ewald and some other moderns follow it herein; but certainly with regard to the change of , at least without sufficient reason; comp. Hitzig and Elster on this passage. But nothing obliges us, in the second clause,, to deviate from the Masoretic text, as Hengstenberg has correctly shown in opposition to the authors last named. For as 3d, prterite, suits the adverb better than does the substantive ; but the closing words give an excellent sense as an independent animated exclamation: and he hath much sorrow and wrath with his sickness! What is meant is the sickness of soul produced by the annoyance and dissatisfaction felt as against those things that oppose his striving after riches, [in substance the same as that darkness in the preceding line] a sickness which can eventually extend to his body and then torment him only the more severely.9

6. Third Division: Ecc 5:18-20. Concerning a moderate and gratefully contented enjoyment of life, as the only true and wise conduct for the poor and for the rich; comp. the exactly similar closing sentence of the first discourse, Ecc 2:24-26, and also the close of the first part of the second discourse, Ecc 3:22.Behold that which I have seen: it is good and comely, etc. Hitzig and Hahn say: What I have found good, and what beautiful; Hengstenberg: behold what I have seen, that it is good and handsome, etc. This latter translation is the only one that corresponds exactly to the accentuation,10 which (by a rebia over ) strongly separates the from what precedes, but scarcely expresses the sense originally intended by the author himself. Our own view corresponds rather to this original sense, which alone is rightly in accordance with the position of before .To eat and to drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labor. The suffix in belongs to the previously unexpressed subject of the infinitive clauses etc.; comp. Ecc 7:1; Ps. 4:9; 65:9, etc. The eating, and drinking, and enjoying the good [lit., seeing the good, comp. Ecc 2:24) is as little meant in an Epicurean sense here as in similar earlier passages; it expresses simply the normal contrast to the grasping avarice previously censured.For it is his portion, [ : ,that it should be his portion; denoting end, purpose, or, as it is rendered in the Metrical Version, to be his portion here,so as not to interrupt the flow of the sentence.T. L.] It is his lot divinely appointed unto him for this life, that he cannot take with him into the world beyond (Ecc 5:15) and which he must consequently properly profit by here below (comp. Ecc 3:22).

Ecc 5:19. Every man also to whom God hath given riches and wealth. Hitzig unnecessarily renders that God gives him, (or if) etc. The anakolouthon between the nominative absolute every man and the final clause: that is the gift of God, cannot be thus removed.And hath given him power to eat thereof, etc. For to cause to rule, to empower any one, comp. Psa 119:133; Dan 2:28; Dan 2:48. That is the gift of God. The emphasis does not rest on , as in the similar thought in Ecc 2:24, but on , which here therefore means a noble gift (, , Jam 1:17) a gracious present, as the following verse teaches. Comp. also Horace, Epis. I., 4, 6;

D tibi divitias dederunt, arlemque fruendi.

Ecc 5:20. For he shall not much remember the days of his life. That is not as Ewald says: Memory and enjoyment of this life do not last long, which would clearly give a totally foreign thought, but he now forgets all toil and vexation of his former life,11 and learns, in consequence of the divine beneficence which he gratefully and contentedly enjoys, to forget the miserable life (Luther) that he previously led, and cares no more concerning the rapid flight and short duration of his earthly days, (comp. Ecc 6:12). Because God answereth him in the joy of his heart. The second is subjoined to the first one in the commencement of the clause, and is therefore better translated with because or since than with for. lit. he answers him with, i.e., he hears him by vouchsafing, etc.; for this signification of the Hiph, of comp. 1Ki 8:35; 2Ch 6:26; Hos 2:23. All other meanings are contrary to the language and connection, e.g. Hitzig: he makes him ready to serve; Kster: he makes him sing with the joy of his heart; Vaihinger (according to the Sept. and Vulg.): he occupies him with the joy of his heart, etc.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

(With Homiletical Hints,)

The threefold means given in this chapter for obtaining and advancing earthly happiness, are the fulfilment of duty towards God, our neighbors, and ourselves; or the three virtues corresponding to these three kinds of duties, and (Tit 2:12; Mat 22:37-39). Among the duties to God, special attention is directed to proper demeanor in regard to prayer and vows; among the duties to our neighbor, the avoiding of injustice and covetousness, and as duties to ourselves, temperance and serene cheerfulness in the enjoyment of the pleasures of this life. Each of these special directions regarding moral demeanor is so presented that its relation to the happiness and peace of mens souls clearly appears. And thus, especially, in the sphere of religious duties, the necessity of pure truthfulness, sacred earnestness, and careful bridling of the tongue (in prayer as in vows), or, in a word, the just fear of God is insisted on as the essence of all those conditions on which depends the preservation of the Divine favor (Ecc 5:4), and thus the foundation of all internal and external happiness. In the obligations of justice and unselfishness towards our neighbor (Ecc 5:8-17) special reference is made to the certainty of judicial visitation on the part of God or the King (Ecc 5:8-9), to the freedom from stinging avarice and torturing care (Ecc 5:10-17), and to the superiority of heavenly treasures, which one is not obliged to leave here and sacrifice at death, as is the case with earthly treasures (Ecc 5:13-16); and these are represented as just so many sources of real inward happiness and peace. With regard to the serenity of life recommended at the close as a means of properly fulfilling the duties to ones self (Ecc 5:18-20), sensual enjoyment in itself is not so much praised as a principal means of happiness, as is the grateful consciousness that all joys and blessings of this life come from God, together with the diligence and zealous activity in vocation that truly give flavor to the enjoyment of these pleasures (to enjoy the good of all his labor, Ecc 5:18; to rejoice in his labor, Ecc 5:19); and just in this manner is demonstrated the way of acquiring genuine and lasting happiness, in contradistinction to Epicureanism and all that philosophy which declares pleasure to be the chief good. In a comprehensive homiletical treatment of the section, the theme might be presented as follows: Of a godly, just, and chaste life in this world, as the foundation of all genuine happiness in this world and the next; or: Of a right truthfulness, in prayer before God, in administration of earthly goods before men, and in the wise enjoyment of the pleasures of life in presence of ones own conscience; or also (with special reference to contents of verses 8 and 9): Honor all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king (1Pe 2:17).

HOMILETICAL HINTS ON SEPARATE PASSAGES

Ecc 5:1. Hieronymus: Non ingredi domum Dei, sed sine offensione ingredi, laudis est.

Melancthon:Solomon declares that the principal and best worship of God is to listen to His word and faithfully follow it. But it has always been the case that men have invented a multitude of sacrifices, and various ceremonies; thus the heathen, the Pharisees and the monks have falsified the proper way of reverencing God. This audacity of man is here condemned as a deep sin, however much its originators may defend it and praise their superstition as a glorious virtue.

Starke:We must visit the church as creatures who humble themselves before their Creator, as subjects doing homage to their Lord, as paupers begging for spiritual gifts, as sick men imploring aid, as Christians ready to serve Him with willing and pure heart.

Berleburg Bible:One must not be satisfied with simple hearing, else it is this and nothing else, and this was not meant. The outward is simply outward; the true object of external worship must only be to lead to the internal.

Ecc 5:2-3. Brenz:Because God alone dwells in heaven, i.e., is alone true, wise and just, and we live on the earth, and are, therefore, liars, fools, and sinners, it in no manner becomes us with our human wisdom, which in Gods eyes is folly, to judge of divine and heavenly things, and to indulge in many words with God concerning our worldly affairs, experiences and knowledge. But we must listen to God; leave to Him every decision, and silently obey His word as the only true wisdom.

Geier:Think at all times in thy prayer of the majesty of God with whom thou speakest, and of thine own unworthiness, this will then strongly move thy heart in pious devotion.

Berleb. Bible:Let thy words be few;how far-reaching is this precept, in teaching, in preaching, in prayer, and in ordinary life! How many a long sermon would be condemned by this censorship, although it might fulfil all the requirements of the preachers art! And how few spiritual things would be found in many discourses, if they were purified of all useless, unedifying, vain, annoying, and improper words, as they indeed should be !The Saviour has regarded this counsel, and hence has given a very short formula of prayer, in the very beginning of which He impresses on the suppliant the majesty of God who is in heaven, but tempers it with the loving name of father, etc.

Ecc 5:4-7. Brenz:Vows, which proceed from unbelief, or violate the precepts of brotherly love, the Christian should neither make nor fulfil if he has made them. But if the vow proceeds from faith and love, and accords with their commands, then it must be kept: else God will judge thee as the fool, i.e., as the ungodly.

Lange:Dear man, seek to maintain thy baptismal vows, therein hast thou vows enough.

Hansen (Ecc 5:6):The mouth causeth the flesh to sin when it promises what the flesh neither can nor will perform.

Starke (Ecc 5:7):The fear of the Lord is the essence of all true virtue, and it also teaches how one should wisely use his tongue (Jam 1:26).

Hengstenberg:He who really fears God will say nothing concerning Him but that which proceeds from his inmost heart, and vow nothing but that which he is resolved inviolably to keep.

Ecc 5:8-9. Luther:This book teaches thee to give thy heart to rest, and not to fret and pine too much when things go wrong, but, when the devil engages in malice, violence, injustice and oppression of the poor, to be able to say; this is the course of the world; God will judge and avenge it. Let each one, therefore, in his sphere do his work with best diligence, according to the command of God: the rest he may commit to God and suffer. Let him await then what the godless and unjust men may do!

The stone thon canst not lift, let lie;
Thy strength upon some other try.

Melancthon (Ecc 5:8):Observe here the difference between a king and a tyrant. A tyrant devastates and destroys; a good ruler cherishes his country, protects and furthers the interests of agriculture, the prosperity of the Church, the arts and industries, and all good things.

Starke:God is the ruler of all nations (Psa 82:8). The loftiest noble and the meanest peasant must alike humbly acknowledge Him a3 his Lord, and reverence and obey Him.

Wohlfarth:What Solomon says we see yet to-day. Although Church and State make every effort to advance the cause of righteousness and retard that of sin, the realm of evil is nevertheless wide-spread, and covetousness, pride, envy, deceit, voluptuousness, every where raise in oppression their repulsive heads. But let us remember that the earth is ever a land of imperfection; then this will not surprise us; but we shall rather be inclined to find in the contrast in which the reality stands with the belief in Divine justice, a reason for our hope of immortality and final reward, and, while we seek according to our strength to prevent evil, we will ourselves shun every sin, that we may hereafter stand rejoicing before Gods throne.

Ecc 5:10 ff. Luther:What is a miser but a poor, tortured, uneasy soul and heart, that is always looking after that which it does not possess; it is therefore vanity and wretchedness. Are not those happy people who are satisfied with the present favors of God, and comfortable nourishment for the body, and who leave it to God to care for the future ?If now God gives thee riches, use thy share as thou usest thy share of water, and let the rest flow by thee; if thou dost not do so, thy gathering will be all in vain.

Geier:The best inheritance that a rich man can leave to his children is Christian instruction in the discipline and admonition of the Lord, and thorough education in the arts and sciences.

Zeltner:How happy are hearts that are heavenly inclined, that are contented with what the beneficent hand of God has bestowed on them, and enjoy it with His blessing in gratitude.

Wohlfarth:How foolishly do those act who live solely for their earthly existence.

Ecc 5:18-20. Luther:To eat in darkness is nought else than to pass ones life in melancholy. All avaricious and troublesome people find something that does not please them, where they can fret and scold. For they are full of care, vexation, and anxiety; they cannot joyfully eat, nor joyfully drink, but always find something that annoys and offends them.

Lange:A true Christian uses the nourishment and needful supplies of his body, to the especial end that he may recognize the goodness of God in all his labor under the sun.

Hansen:In order to enjoy the good that there is in the riches of this world, it is necessary that one have a perfect rule over them, i.e., that in the use of them he may at all times act in accordance with the Divine purpose, Psa 62:10.

Berleb. Bible:As to the pure every thing is pure (Tit 1:15), so also wealth may be used by such a one in purity, and it will therefore depend mainly on each ones own heart how it stands in the presence of God. But if one does not remain contented and quiet when house and home burn up, or some other injury happens to his possessions, then is he not yet rightly placid and tranquil; this is the proof of it.

Footnotes:

[1][The example that Zckler gives of comparative, without any comparative word before it, will not bear him out. In Ecc 9:17, it is dependent on ; in the other cases cited is either partitive, or has its usual proposition sense. If any comparative word might be thus omitted it might be the familiar word , but there are other ways of explaining the apparent grammatical anomaly without any such harshness, which would be like leaving out, in English, any comparative word before thanto hear than to give. If we regard as an adjective it may have the sense of fit, suitable, appropriate, coming very easily from its primary and usual sense of nearness: to hear is more appropriate than to give; it is nearer in the sense of better. That such a connection of senses is natural, is shown from the Latin prope propior, as HORACE, Sat. 4,42, sermoni propiora, better for prose; Terent. Heant: nulla alia delectation quce propior esset; Ovid. Mel., cura propior luctusqe. It might be proved still more clearly from the Arabic use of a comparative from this very root )=) in the sense of better– that which is nigher, more appropriate. Of this there are frequent examples in the Koran, as in Surah. 2:238, better for piety, more pious; so Surah 18:80, better for compassion, more compassionate. See also Surah 3:160; 4:12; 5:11; 16:79; 20:13. Thus in Hebrew, , nearer, more appropriate, more acceptable (a better or offering) than to give, etc.,audire propius esset quam dare etc. It may be objected to this that such an infinitive with as , is not used subjectively, or very rarely. It, however, comes very much to the same thing, if we take directly as an infinitive, or as used for an imperative: be nigher to hear, that is, more ready, more prompt(propior facilior) to hear, than fools are to offer sacrifice (taking as the subject of ). Or the comparative may depend on in the first clause, the influence of which may be regarded as extending to the second: be more careful ( ) to hear, or to draw nigh to hear, etc. In such case, we get a governing word for the infinitive . If it be said that it is implied or understood; that is always the case where the infinitive seems thus used for the imperative. Some familiar word of admoninon, or warning, is ever implied (look out, take care, etc.).as sometimes in the animated language of the prophets, and as is frequently the case in Greek and Latin.T. L.]

[2][This is another case where those who maintain the late date of the book give a word an unusual sense, and then build an argument upon it. There is no reason why should not be taken in its usual meaning, as an angel of God, visible or invisible, supposed sometimes to appear in terror, the avenging angel, as 2Sa 24:16, who came to punish Israel and their king for his rash words. There may be an express reference here by Solomon to his fathers fatal error; and the words may be rendered very easily as a caution, that thou mayest not have to confess thine error, as David did (2Sa 24:17). It must have made a deep impression on the young mind of the Prince. It is perfectly in accordance, too, with the belief and the recorded facts of the Solomonic times; and this would be the case even if we regard the , mentioned in Ecclesiastes, as being Gad, the messenger sent to David. Or it may refer to the belief in the presence of angels as invisible witnesses to our sins and our improprietiesa belief belonging not only to the Old Testament, but also to the New, as appears from 1Co 11:10, . because of the angles (invisible), indecencies in the Church were to be avoided.T. L.]

[3][Ecc 5:7. The simplest and most literal rendering here would seem to be the best, taking the conjunction , in each case, as it stands, and in the usual way. The copulative has, indeed sometimes, an assertive force, but then the context will always clearly demand it. Here there is no need of it: Though in multitude of dreams, or though dreams abound, and vanities, and words innumerable, yet () fear thou God. The first may be rendered for, and regarded as connecting, causally, this verse with what precedes, or they may both be regarded as adversative, giving the reason against, or notwithstanding. See explanation of Int. to Metrical Version, p 176. The word we have rendered, in the Metrical Version, presagings (idle predictions, fortune tellings, such as go with dreams). is used, Num 23:5; Num 23:16, for oraculum. It is the oracle given to Balaam, and though, there, a divine message given to a bad man, yet there is nothing in the word itself to prevent its denoting a false, as well as a true prediction. If the view taken be correct, there must be meant, here, false or superstitious presagings, like the Greek , which is used by Aristophanes for the false predictions of the oracle-mongers, by whom Greece was infested. is used in the same manner, Ecc 10:14, where the context shows that it means either pretended oracular words, or fortune-tellings, or some such rash sayings about the future as are condemned Jam 4:13. The other rendering: in multitude of dreams and vanities there are also words, besides having seemingly but little meaning, puts its main assertion in the first clause, and thus makes the second: fear thou God, a merely incidental or rhetorical addition, though really the important thought: notwithstanding the abounding of (all these superstitions) dreams, vanities and fortune-tellings without number, yet fear thou God. In the other rendering, too, besides being less simple and facile, there is lost, or obscured, the contrast evidently intended between , in the bad sense, or superstition, and , true religion, reverence, , the fear of the Lord. For an illustration. see the picture of the superstitious man () as given by Theophrastus in his Characters, sec.16.T. L.]

[4] [The plural intensive undoubtedly exists in Hebrew, but a great deal that is said about the pluralis majestaticus is very questionable. The best Jewish commentators deny its existence. The plural , here, may easily be taken as a sort of summing up, denoting all the powers that stand above the petty oppressor, from the earthly king, through principalities in the Heavens up to God Himself. Our English Version gives it well, and there be higher than they, leaving the application indefinite. Stuart regards as intensive: Yea there be higher than they,the petty oppressors. Or it may be an assertion that there is a vast series of ascending powers in the olam, or world, regarded in its rank, rather than its time or space aspect. See note on Olamic Words, p. 51. The reader may imagine the gradation of ranks for himself. Of course, God is at the highest, however great it may be. This would accord with the simplest rendering of the words:

Height over height are keeping watch,
and higher still than they.
These vile oppressors, with all their boasts of rank, are away down in the lowest parts of the scale.T. L.]

[5] [Ecc 5:9. The interpretations of Zckler, Hitzig, Stuart, etc., though differing from each other, seem forced. They all destroy the parallelism, making only one proposition of what evidently contains two clauses, one an illustration of the other. Their rendering of , as though it were equivalent to , Isa 9:11; Isa 9:20, cannot be supported. is a feminine used for the neuter, and may have, in such case, an antecedent masculine in form, if it expresses what is inanimate or impersonal. The profit of the soil, in everything is it,like, , an error is it, Just above. It is in all, in everything, in every rank of life. The word has more of a deponent than of a passive sense. In other cases, Deu 21:4; Eze 36:9; Eze 36:34, it is applied to the field that is made use of, worked, in distinction from the barren. This is the only case in which it is applied to persons, and according to the same analogy, it does not mean served as a master, which would be the direct passive of the Kal, but subservient to, or made to serve, coming near to the Kal sense, or the sense of the noun: made useful, or devoted to use. The connection, then, is very clear. The oppressor is reproved, not by extolling the king as the guardian of justice, and patron of agriculture, but by setting forth the value of the lowly, the cultivators of the soil, to whom the highest ranks, and, ultimately, the king himself, are subservient,on whom they are dependent, and to whom they may be said, in the last resort, to owe homage. This more Republican idea, and so much more in harmony with the whole spirit of the passage, is sustained by wordsworth. The resort to the

Chaldaic signification of = to the Hebrew , is wholly needless and unsatisfactory. If the monarchical interpretation, as we may call it, fails, then also falls to the ground what is said about the Persians, and the kings protection of agriculture in the provinces, together with the inference that would then be drawn in respect to the date of the book. Such a dependence of the king upon the field is just n truth which would be perceived by the wise Solomon, but would be unheeded by a Persian monarch, or any writer who would wish to extol him. Herzfelds interpretation is very nigh this. Our English Version. the king is served by the field, or from the field, would require a different preposition.T. L.]

[6][See the explanation in the text note.T. L.]

[7] [ may mean here the labor and travail expended in acquiring the riches. That wealth perishes with all the labor, etc., it took to get it. Such is the more literal sense of , as well as the more expressive. He has lost all his labor and travail as well as his wealth. Compare the Metrical Version.

With the sore travail [it had cost] that wealth departs. T. L.]

[8][We have the similar phrase in Englishconsumeth his daysbut it is questionable whether is ever thus used in Hebrew. In Job 21:13; Job 36:11, the verb is different.T. L.]

[9] [Hitzig regards the text here as corrupt, and proposes to read and . There is no serious difficulty in taking as a noun [the first patach lengthened, as Jona Ben Gannach shows may be done]. The other correction, and Hitzigs charge of corruption, only show that a very acute critic, not having much imagination, may not sympathize with the poetical style, or the emotional earnestness of such a writer as Koheleth, and must therefore, often fail in interpreting him. The apparent irregularity of the sentence shows a vehement utterance, the thoughts crowding together, coming in, some of them out of their order, as though anticipated, or in danger of being forgotten. The most literal, therefore, is the rendering which is most true to this subjective emotional state: great grief, sickness his, and wrath; or to give it something of its rythmical order:

Yea, all his days, doth he in darkness eat;
Abundant sorrow, sickness too is his, and chafing wrath.T. L]

[10][Those noble scholars, the Buxtorfs, and the learned as well as devout Boston, were not altogether without reason in their belief that the Hebrew system of accents, as found in our Hebrew Bibles, partook, in some degree, of the biblical inspiration. There is a critical acuteness, a spiritual-mindedness, we may say, manifested by those early accentuators. from whom came the traditional masora, that is truly wonderful. There are many examples in the Psalms. There is an instance of it, we think, in this passage, vers.18 and 19. They have place a rebia, a disjunctive accent, over ver.18 thereby separating it from that follows. This our English translators have observed, as also Hahn, Hengstenberg and others, who, after all, do not make the right use of it. Zckler acknowledging though disregarding the accents, renders: behold what I have seen as good, that it is fair to eat, etc.,making , a conjunction. To follow the accentuation, however, is the only way to bring out the sense in all its force and clearness. The other method makes and synonymous, and represents eating and drinking as the good per se, without qualification; the assertion afterwards made, about its being the gift of god, having no effect in changing, or modifying this positive declaration. On the contrary, the accentual rendering, makes the perception and the consciousness of this [ ], the very thing that constitutes the good which is fair [ ], in distinction from the mere pleasure which he epicurean would call good. Thus it reads, according to the accents: good that is fair, to eat and drink, etc.,(that is, in eating and drinking), and to see the good, etc.,intimating that there is a good, or seeming good, that is not fair, or beautiful a that is not . To make thus as a relative pronoun, is the only way to avoid a tautology; for the other rendering makes no distinction between and , or rather regards the one as but a repetition of the other. It is true that, in such use of , the personal pronoun generally follows [ ] but not always, as Gen 7:8, , and similar cases, especially Hos 12:8, they shall not find in me, , iniquity that is sin, meaning by a qualification of the general term , or a known and wilful sin, one deserving of punishment, as both Kimchi and Aben Ezra explain it. Grammatically and logically it is precisely similar to this case. It is not easy to resist the conclusion that a logical differentia, some qualifying of , was hero intended. It is, in fact, that same distinction which is made by the ordinary mind, if devout, and which we find in Plato, the mystical, as some style him, but who is, in reality, the clearest, and in the truest sense of the term, the most common-sense of all the philosophers. It is the that is (since the sensualist also has his , so called, which is not , but only ) the , or to use similar language of Cicero, the bonum that is pulchrum, the dulce that is honestum. It is the word, used Ecc 3:11 to denote the beauty of everything in its season, as God made it, , or as the world was pronounced all good, all fair, at creation, whilst still in unison with the divine name and presence. The that is , the good that is fair, must have some other element in it than mere sense-enjoyment, or voluptas (velle quod optat). This appears by another accentual mark. The same acute critics have place a zakeph gadhol, another strong disjunctive accent, upon the demonstrative pronoun in ver.19, thereby making it more emphatic, by separating it from the adjoining words, thus constituting it a clause by itself, as it were, to which special attention is called. By being thus separated from what is near, it goes back to the mentioned some ways above. or to the idea contained, and carries it through all the clauses: good that is fair, to eat and drink, and see the good, etc., (through all that follow in the long recital) this this (good) I say is Gods own gift. The meaning is, that the recognition and the consciousness of this are necessary to make it good, or the good emphatically the good that is fairand that, without this it would not be , honestum, etc., but sheer sensualism, which in itself, he so often pronounces worthlessness and vanity. The whole passage, 1820, has the air of a solemn recapitulation, in which the writer means to express his deepest and truest feeling: and now, behold what I have seen: good that is fair, etc.; all such good is from above, and there is really no other that deserves to be so called. It is imbued throughout with the name of God, as though His name were inseparable from any true idea of the good. Taking the accents in their intended form, the passage has a most eloquent fulness; disregarding them, we have sheer Epicureanism, expressed in what seems a verbose style, tautological, unmeaning, and, withal, out of harmony with the general scope of the book. The earnestness of the writer in his desire of fully setting out the thought, is shown by the repetition in the beginning of the 19th verse: , yea every man, as God has given him wealth, aid power to eat thereof, and bear his portion, etc., and then the strong accented making the peroration of the whole; so that the Epicurean or sensualist could claim no fragment of it as, in the least, favoring the godless philosophy. See the Metrical Version. It is all idle to put the most naked Epicureanism in the mouth of the writer, as Zckler and Stuart do, and then deny it is such, or attempt to weave for it some possible evangelical robe.T. L ]

[11] [Ewalds view is to be preferred, though with a modification. In the recognition of the higher good (see marginal note, p. 94), or the gift and blessing of God, the mere sensual pleasure, the mere living, as an enjoyment, is not much remembered, nor the time it lasts. The higher aspect makes the lower seem less, though not undervalued.

Not life itself, with all its joys,
Could my best passions move,
Or raise so high my cheerful voice,
As Thine endearing love.

Compare it with Psa 4:5 : Thou hast put joy in my heart more than [the joy of] the time [], when their corn and their wine increase; and especially with the verse preceding (Psa 4:7) Many are Buying (it is the great inquiry among men) who will show us good (the good, the summum bonum, the , the good that is beautiful), and then how full of light, and power, and meaning, is the answer: Lift Thou upon us the light of Thy countenance, Jehovah. That was the good which philosophy, whether Epicurean or Stoical, could never find: The Light of Thy countenance, or of Thy presence! We have become so familiar with this precious Hebraism, that we lose sight of its glorious beauty. In what other language, or literature, can we find anything like it? With the sentiment of Koheleth that it is the thought of Gods grace that makes the good, compare also the language, Psa 30:5 : In His favor is life, and Psa 63:4; Thy loving-kindness is better than life a good that is more than life. It is the same idea, though the language of Koheleth is more calm, more philosophic, we may say, than the impassioned diction of the Psalmist, made more striking and emotional by the use of the second person.T. L.]

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

CONTENTS

The Preacher here enters upon a view of sacred worship in the house of God. He shows that all service void of spiritual worship is vanity. This is followed with similar observations, tending to prove that whatever men place their confidence in the world, terminates in disappointment.

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

Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil. (2) Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter anything before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.

Perhaps Solomon had in view the situation of Moses at the bush, and of Joshua, before the captain of the Lord’s host, by Jericho. Exo 3:5 ; Jos 5:13-15 . But keeping the foot, on entering the house of God, certainly carries with it a reference to the corresponding affections suited to a true spiritual worshipper. Under the gospel dispensation, we may suppose it implies what our Lord Jesus taught of worshipping God, who is a Spirit, in spirit, and in truth. Joh 4:23-24 .

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

Ecc 5:2

To bind myself to diligence in seeking the Lord, and to stir me up thereto, I made a vow to pray so many times a day; how many times I cannot be positive; but it was at least thrice. It was the goodness of God to me, that it was made only for a definite space of time; but I found it so far from being a help, that it was really a hindrance to my devotion, making me more heartless in, and averse to, duty, through the corruption of my nature. I got the pain of it driven out accordingly; but I never durst make another of that nature since, nor so bind up myself, where God had left me at liberty.

Thomas Boston.

Ecc 5:2

‘Suddenly and offhand,’ says Kstlin, ‘Luther was hurried into a most momentous decision. Towards the end of June, 1505, when several Church festivals fall together, he paid a visit to his home at Mansfeld in quest, very possibly, of rest and comfort to his mind. Returning on 2nd July, the feast of the Visitation of the Virgin Mary, he was already near Erfurt, when, at the village of Stotternheim, a terrific storm broke over his head. A fearful flash of lightning darted from heaven before his eyes. Trembling with fear, he fell to the earth and exclaimed, “Help, Anna, beloved Saint! I will be a monk!” A few days after, when quietly settled at Erfurt, he repented having used these words. But he felt that he had taken a vow.’

Do not accustom yourself to enchain your volatility with vows; they will sometimes leave a thorn in your mind, which you will, perhaps, never be able to extract or eject. Take this warning; it is of great importance.

Johnson to Boswell.

Ecc 5:2

What people call fluency, and the gift of prayer, is often delusive; it is mere excitement from the presence of others, and from the sound of our own voice.

F. W. Robertson.

There is no need to say much to God. One often does not talk much to a friend whom one is delighted to see; one enjoys looking at him, and one says some few words which are purely matter of feeling. One does not so much seek interchange of thought as rest and communion of heart with one’s friend. Even so it should be with God a word, a sigh, a thought, a feeling, says everything.

Fnelon.

Reference. V. 2. J. T. Bramston, Sermons to Boys, p. 116.

Ecc 5:8

In describing the need for the reforms of Csar under the new monarchy, Mommsen ( History of Rome, book v. xl.) declares that ‘the most incurable wounds were inflicted as justice by the doings of the advocates. In proportion as the parasitic plant of Roman forensic eloquence flourished, all positive ideas of right became broken up…. A plain, simple defendant, says a Roman advocate of much experience at this period, may be accused of any crime at pleasure which he has, or has not, committed, and will be certainly condemned.’

For a tear is an intellectual thing.

And a sigh is the sword of an Angel king,

And the bitter groan of a martyr’s woe

Is an arrow from the Almighty bow.

Blake.

There are some persons of that reach of soul that they would like to live 250 years hence, to see to what height of empire America will have grown up in that period, or whether the English constitution will last so long. These are points beyond me. But I confess I should like to live to see the downfall of the Bourbons. That is a vital question with me; and I shall like it the better, the sooner it happens.

Hazlitt.

See Lowell’s poem, Villa Franca.

The repugnance of man to injustice is with him an early and favourite topic of proof.

Gladstone on Butler.

Reference. V. 8. A. W. Momerie, Agnosticism, p. 219.

Ecc 5:10

See Ruskin’s On the Old Road (II. sec. 162) for a comment on a ‘lover of silver ‘.

Ecc 5:13

To acquire interest on money, and to acquire interest in life are not the same thing.

Edward Carpenter.

References. V. 13-20. R. Buchanan, Ecclesiastes : its Meaning and Lessons, p. 191. V. 15. A. Maclaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture Ecclesiastes, p. 358.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

A Call to Reverence

Ecc 5

The subject is now changed. Up to this time we have had Coheleth’s view of life given with much graphic force and vividness. We have seen his world a mere card-house of a world, well painted and wonderfully gilded, yet cold and full of discontent, with “Vanity of vanities” written in boldest letters over its portals. Now Coheleth turns to a higher theme. Yet, though the subject has changed, there is no change in the main principle. Coheleth is still talking about vanity, insincerity, and unsatisfactoriness; his strong point is that we may turn the sanctuary itself into an unreality; that the outside world may absorb the sacred enclosure, and that prayer itself may be turned into a mere trick of words. Let us get the Preacher’s notion of the house of God:

“Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil” ( Ecc 5:1 ).

We are here called to reverence and solidity of character in the place of prayer. Do not be giddy, flippant, and impiously merry in the sacred place. Do not go to talk, but to listen, and be sure to leave all foolishness outside. “Be more ready to hear than to talk.” Do not go to the house of God to teach, but to learn. Listen for the coming of the Holy One. Let no vulgar voice throw the spell of its rude music upon you, but open your ear toward heaven and wait patiently for God. Into these modern words may we throw the advice of the Preacher. This is the code of proper behaviour for the sanctuary. The house of God is not a debating club, nor is it an academy of science, much less is it a place of mere entertainment; there is an altar there and a holy revelation, and the omniscient God, and the very air is full of watching and helping spirits. “This is none other than the house of God.” Let a man go into the holy place boisterously, self-sufficiently, hot from some vexatious debate, or worried by worldly memories, and he will scare away the spirit of the place; but let him go penitently, simple in purpose, conscious of need, with a heart full of expectation and tender desire towards God, and the poorest music will swell into grand anthems, and the simplest discourse will glow as with fire from heaven. “Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoe from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.” “Keep thy foot:” put off thy sandals from off thy feet. “The captain of the Lord’s host said unto Joshua: Loose thy shoe from off thy foot; for the place whereon thou standest is holy.” So there is a right way for the foot in the sanctuary. Is there a more unseemly sight than that of irreverent tramplers in the house of God? Are there not many who defile the floor of the house, nor care how their feet injure the very woodwork of God’s place of rest? Reverence is the first element of worship. Everything of the nature of restlessness or fretfulness in connection with the services of the sanctuary is to be most solemnly deprecated. “The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord.” “The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.” The presence of such a spirit in the worshipper will be a guarantee of reverence, simplicity, and intensest earnestness. Flippancy can hear nothing in all the music of revelation, or in all the sacrifice of song. Its ear is full of vulgar noise, and its eye is on the outlook for objects that can entertain or amuse. Flippancy is an offence in the house of God, and should be scourged out of it, not only because of what it is in itself, but because of its mischievous influence upon the young and the devout. Distinctions must be drawn between place and place. There is common ground upon which all the usual engagements of life can be conducted, but beyond that line there is a sanctuary in which men should tread cautiously, and into which they should look reverently, and where they should listen with profoundest awe, because the only voice to be heard in the sacred place is the voice of God and truth.

“Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter anything before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few” ( Ecc 5:2 ).

We have not known the proper place of Silence in the worship of God. We have unduly magnified the eloquence of man, and waited for the opening of human lips rather than for the opening of the gate of heaven. Why should there not be a few moments’ silence in every service? Think of a great congregation with bowed heads silently praying for the coming of the divine kingdom, patiently and lovingly expecting the baptism of the Holy Ghost! Would not the sight please him who looks upon the heart and delights in the expectation of his people? Instead of that what is too often seen? Love of excitement, impatient waiting for a favourite preacher, discontent if the pulpit idol falls short of his own mark. This is not worship; it is indeed little better than blasphemy; there is no supreme love of God in it; it is a Sunday gallop through a religious picture gallery spiritual dissipation thinly disguised by decorous habit. Even when we take part in the worship of God vocally, we should criticise the words we speak lest they convey false meanings to ourselves or to listening heaven. Men may tell lies in hymn and psalm. At the same time it is possible for men to use the noblest forms of adoration, confession, and supplication, and for each worshipper to attach his own meaning to the holy terms he is employing, so that God may know the exact meaning of the worshipper’s heart. Even in our prayer and praise we may suggest unworthy doubts in the form of asking questions in reverent terms. The psalmist confessed his own infirmity in this direction; he said: “Will the Lord cast off for ever? and will he be favourable no more? Is his mercy clean gone for ever? doth his promise fail for evermore? Hath God forgotten to be gracious? hath he in anger shut up his tender mercies?” Then he remembered that he was but revealing his own infirmity, rather than correctly describing the divine relation to the human race. An instance is given in the New Testament, in which rashness was quietly condemned by Jesus Christ The suppliant woman said: “Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left, in thy kingdom. But Jesus answered and said: Ye know not what ye ask.” Coheleth says, “Let thy words be few.” This is not to be taken literally, as if the words were to be numbered and not to exceed so many. The spirit condemned is the spirit of talkativeness, talking for talking’s sake mere intellectual flippancy. A prayer may be long in time yet short in quality; that is to say, so long as the heart can really and lovingly talk to God, even if a whole night be spent in prayer it shall be reckoned but as the lapse of a moment. When men speak merely for speaking’s sake they do not pray. “When ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.”

“When thou vowest a vow unto God, defer not to pay it; for he hath no pleasure in fools: pay that which thou hast vowed. Better it is that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay” ( Ecc 5:4-5 ).

How few men have any adequate idea of the extent of the sin of breaking vows! We should be astounded if we knew all that can be said respecting this iniquity. The immorality of nominal Christians in this particular is simply prodigious; so much so that a signature is of no value, a promise is but idle breath, a vow is but a word spoken in heat and allowed to cool into a lie. The Bible insists upon every vow being performed, even though, in some instances, the purpose of it may be to the hurt of the man who is bound by its terms. “That which is gone out of thy lips thou shalt vow and perform.” “I will pay thee my vows, which my lips have uttered, and my mouth hath spoken, when I was in trouble.” “Thy vows are upon me, O God: I will render praises unto thee.” If all the vows which we have spoken could be now fulfilled, how great would be the result! Life should be rich with vows: they throw a glad solemnity over us; they come before us as hindrances when we would go in forbidden directions; they are voices that whisper in the wind; they are appeals to our best strength. It is after all but a mean thing to say that we will refrain from making vows; such a condition is not the joy of liberty, it is not the dignity of discipline; it is looseness, license, wildness, selfishness. Throw the discipline of a vow upon passion: build altars all along the line of life’s journey, and let those who come after us see how we have prayed, and how we have turned our vows into holy deeds. “If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond, he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.” This was Old Testament morality in the matter of words. Is there any righteousness superior to that in all the writings of subsequent revelation? Words are not mere sounds or terms or symbols; they are pledges, vows, oaths, unwritten obligations, and no man is to be trusted who can make light of his own word, or speak so lightly as really not to convey the meaning of his heart. “When thou shalt vow a vow unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee. But if thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee. That which is gone out of thy lips thou shalt keep and perform; even a free will offering, according as thou hast vowed unto the Lord thy God, which thou hast promised with thy mouth.” There is one vow which every soul is called upon to make, and that is to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with God. If we do not vow in one direction it may be because we are anxious to vow in another that is to say, if we do not vow in prayer it may be that we may take larger license to sin. A very careful distinction should be made here by the spiritual student. Not to vow may be not to incur responsibility; at the same time, abstinence from vowing in an upward and heavenly direction may be a kind of negative vow to enjoy larger moral freedom from religious restraint. Let a man examine himself and be honest in his decisions upon this great subject. Coheleth says, in this fourth verse, God “hath no pleasure in fools,” nor ought we to have. Fools are the burdens of society; fools have no right in the sanctuary. It does not follow that a man who is merely ignorant is a fool; this is a folly of the heart; it is moral lunacy; many a man who is almost a genius in mere intellect is the veriest fool in conscience, in sensibility, and in honour of soul.

Coheleth would make out that the sanctuary is wider than the mere walls of the nominal house:

“If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not at the matter: for he that is higher than the highest regardeth; and there be higher than they” ( Ecc 5:8 ).

We are cautioned against drawing religious conclusions from what is merely seen by the eye. The world has a side upon which “Atheism” seems to be plainly written. There are scenes which are positively irreligious. Events happen which seem to have no law; rugged, tragic, destructive events; but the Preacher says, There is more than you see there is an Eye looking through the cloud there is a Judge who will do right. Do not distress yourselves about things you cannot control. We may tear ourselves to pieces by taking upon us the consideration of questions too high for us. If we be moved, will God be without sensation? If we cannot look on without rising anger, can the Judge of the whole earth look on without just indignation? “For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the Lord; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him.” Throughout the whole Scripture we have seen how the Lord espouses the cause of righteousness, and sets himself in eternal hostility against the wicked. Early in the book we become accustomed to such an announcement as this: “The cry of the children of Israel is come unto me: and I have also seen the oppression wherewith the Egyptians oppress them.” The outside of the sanctuary is not an unholy place. God’s light of common day is not a tainted thing on which no benediction has been pronounced. God’s air is not polluted breath. It is the joy of the Christian to believe that the whole earth is a consecrated place, and that God’s purpose is to scourge evil out of it and to fill the whole world with his glory.

“Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the king himself is served by the field” ( Ecc 5:9 ).

The profound lesson taught by these words is that where there is profit there ought to be religion. God has surrounded men with religious ministers that are not religiously named. All nature is meant to teach the unity, the majesty, and the bountifulness of God. The growing field is to be a kind of secular sanctuary in which men are to see the handiwork of the beneficent Father. The earth is for all: the humblest man is to find in it a standing-place for life and a resting-place in death. The earth is not to be held by great monopolists, but is to be considered the universal property of the human family. “The king himself is served by the field.” There are lines upon which all men are one. We are all guests at one table in the largest sense. Royalty cannot do without agriculture, no more can the poorest human creature who begs a brother of the earth to give him leave to toil. It does us good now and again to get back to those common lines, that we may realise the unity of human nature, and feel how true it is that the prayer which suits all lips is the prayer of Jesus Christ, beginning “Our Father, which art in heaven.” We are to be careful not to demand more of the field than we can profitably and beneficially use. We may love silver until we cannot be satisfied with it, and may desire abundance until increase fails to gratify. As hunger has its limits, so ought abundance to be set within boundaries marked by reason and justice. “They that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.” The cautions addressed to rich men in the Bible are most poignant and numerous. “Go to, now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire.” All these matters, however, do not come within the region of mere instruction; they are rather connected with the realm of pure spirituality. No miser was ever converted by lecturing. Probably, no covetous man was ever made to see the error of his ways merely through didactic philosophy. We can only be right in these lower matters as we are right with God. When we enter into the pureness of his Spirit, and the all-bountifulness of his heart, we shall know that the earth is for all, and that “the king himself is served by the field,” because he is a man first and a king afterwards. To this happy issue, social revolutions of a violent kind contribute next to nothing. Right understandings as to properties and profits and social relations can only come through a wise and loving apprehension of the relation sustained by Jesus Christ to the whole human family. In the meantime there are great compensations to be enjoyed by all honest souls:

“The sleep of a labouring man is sweet, whether he eat little or much: but the abundance of the rich will not suffer him to sleep” ( Ecc 5:12 ).

Many a man who has not the proprietor’s parchment has the poet’s appreciation of the landscape. Men should be more anxious to discover the compensations than to dwell upon the deficiencies and discomforts of life. Coheleth was not slow to notice many sore evils amongst those who seemed to have all the earth at their command; beyond all men he could see behind the scenes and fix his eye attentively upon the worm which was gnawing the root of the stoutest tree. The Preacher saw a sore evil in the fact that “riches” are “kept for the owners thereof to their hurt.” Another sore evil he saw in the son rising to scatter the wealth of the father. And yet another sore evil he beheld, in that a man came into the world with nothing and with nothing went out of it, as if he had laboured for the wind and found no profit in all the storm. “Be not thou afraid when one is made rich, when the glory of his house is increased; for when he dieth he shall carry nothing away: his glory shall not descend after him.” “Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.” He who enters into the spirit of this philosophy and bows himself under the influence of this sublime resignation can never be poor. His song is: “Although the fig-tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls: yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation.” Christianity rids us of the sophism that increase of possessions is increase of life. “A man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.” Even the psalmist had a foretaste of this great blessedness when he exclaimed: “Thou hast put gladness in my heart, more than in the time that their corn and their wine increased.”

Prayer

Almighty God, thou dost see us as we are; there is nothing hidden from thine eye. Thou knowest how far our spirit and our posture are one: we cannot hide the discrepancies between our ceremonies and our truest desires from the Living Eyes. All things show themselves to thee in their reality. Thou God seest us through and through: we cannot hide anything from thee; the darkness and the light are both alike to thee. Thou knowest the thought before it is a speech yea, thou knowest the motive in its earliest motion, in the deepest recesses of the soul. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God; yet it is the best thing. Thou knowest our frame, thou rememberest that we are dust; thou dost not expect more from us than our poor strength can give. It is better to fall into the hands of God than into the hands of men. Thy compassions fail not. Thou seest every upward look; thou hearest every sigh that has in it the solemnity of prayer. Thou dost watch us in our best moments as well as in our worst, and thou knowest the gold that is to be found in all the mixture of our character. Thou dost separate the chaff from the wheat: the wheat thou dost retain, the chaff thou wilt commit to the wind. It is, therefore, better to fall into the hands of God than into the hands of men. Judge us, O God, and spare us! If thy judgment come through our petition, it shall not be solely judgment: in it there shall be mercy and pity and anxious love, a father’s desire to discover, even amidst ruins, some trace of filial attachment and childlike love. We put ourselves into thy hands, not for the judgment of the law, but for the consideration of mercy. God be merciful unto us sinners! The Lord hear us wherein we desire his pity, and let him multiply it upon us until our sins be swallowed up in the appointed way through Jesus Christ, Son of man, Son of God, Lamb of God, Saviour of the world. Amen.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XXVI

THE PROLOGUE AND THREE METHODS APPLIED

Ecc 1:2-5:9

“Vanity of vanities” (Ecc 1:2 ) is a Hebraism and means the most utter vanity. Compare “Holy of holies” and “Servant of servants” (Gen 9:25 ). This does not mean that all things are vanity in themselves, but that they are all vanity when put in the place of God, or made the chief end of life instead of a means to an end.

The meaning and purpose of the question in Ecc 1:3 is to inquire as to the profit of all labor and worry which we see about us as touching the chief good, but does not mean that labor is not profitable in its proper place. (Cf. Gen 2:15 ; Gen 3:19 ; Pro 14:23 ).

There is a beautiful parallel to Ecc 1:4 in modern literature, viz: “The Brook” by Tennyson. The stanza that sounds so much like this is as follows: And out again I curve and flow To join the brimming river, For men may come and men may go, But I go on forever.

The sun, wind, and rivers in their endless courses (Ecc 1:5-7 ) are illustrations of the meaning of the text from the material world. The monotony of all this is expressed in Ecc 1:8 , thus: “All things are full of weariness; man cannot utter it; the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.”

The meaning of Ecc 1:9-10 is that there is no new source of happiness (the subject in question) which can be devised, the same round of pleasures, cares, business, and study being repeated over and over again; that in the nature of things, there is no new thing which might give us hope of attaining that satisfaction that hitherto things have not afforded.

Ecc 1:11 is an explanation of Ecc 1:9-10 and means that some things are thought to be new which are not really so because of the imperfect records of the past. This seems to hedge against the objection that there are many inventions and discoveries unknown to former ages by showing that the records do not preserve all these inventions for the present generation and therefore they are only thought to be new. The methods applied in this search for the chief good are wisdom, pleasure, great works, riches, and a golden mean. The author claims for himself in Ecc 1:12-17 that he was king over Israel in Jerusalem and that he had applied himself in search of all that was done under heaven, to find that it was a sore travail which God had permitted the sons of men to be exercised with; that he had seen all the works done under the sun and found them all vanity and a striving after wind; that he had found many crooked things and many things wanting; that he had attained to greater wisdom than all others before him in Jerusalem and had applied it to know madness and folly, to find this, too, to be a striving after wind. The final result of it all is given in Ecc 1:18 , thus: “For in much wisdom is much grief; and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.”

The experiment described in Ecc 2:1-3 is the test of worldly pleasure, with the result that it, too, was vanity. Then in Ecc 2:4-11 he gives his experience in the pursuit of great works; he built houses, planted vineyards) made gardens and parks, planted trees, made pools of water, bought servants of all kinds, gathered silver and gold, provided a great orchestra for his entertainment, in fact, had everything his eyes desired and tried to find in them joy and comfort, but upon due reflection, he found this, too, a striving after the wind and to no profit under the sun.

In Ecc 2:12-17 we have his comparison between wisdom and folly, with the result that wisdom far excels folly or pleasure, yet the same thing happens to the fool and to the wise man, viz: both die and are forgotten. So he was made to hate life because his work was grievous and a striving after wind. There is ground for the hatred of labor because he must die and leave it to another (Ecc 2:18-23 ). The reference in Ecc 2:19 is to Rehoboam; Solomon evidently suspected his course. Therefore, the conclusion of Ecc 2:24 is that there is nothing better for a man than to eat and drink) and to make his soul enjoy his labor, but the thought (Ecc 2:24-25 f) that it is all from God and that it is all subject to God’s disposal, knocks it over.

In Ecc 3:1-5:9 we have the elements that limit:

I. The Divine Elements are,

1. The law of opportunes (Ecc 3:1-8 )

2. The eternity in our hearts (Ecc 3:9-11 a)

3. The finiteness of man’s nature (Ecc 3:11 b)

4. The laws of God are infrangible (Ecc 3:14 )

II. The Human Elements are,

1. Iniquity in the place of justice (Ecc 3:16 )

2. The oppression of the poor (Ecc 4:1 )

3. Labor and skill actuated only by rivalry with the neighbor (Ecc 4:4 )

4. The elements of weakness in human worship (Ecc 5:1-7 )

On the law of opportunes, will say that we have to work under this law all the days of our lives. Things must be done in their time or they are a failure.

“God hath put eternity in our hearts” (Ecc 3:11 ) is a great text. This means -that money and worldly things cannot satisfy the yearning of the human heart, which is for eternal things. Therefore, the conclusion in Ecc 3:12 is the same as in Ecc 2:24 , but the God thought knocks it over (Ecc 3:13 ): “Then I saw that wisdom excelleth folly, as far as light excelleth darkness.”

Ecc 3:14-15 mean that the laws of God are infrangible, i.e., cannot be broken with impunity, and that whoever breaks the laws of the divine limitations him will God break.

It is an awful observation the author cites in Ecc 3:16 . The observation is that iniquity was in the place of justice; that unjust men in court block the way of the righteous if they appeal to them. This is like the parable of the widow and unjust judge. A modification of this thought is found in the divine element, that God will judge the righteous and the wicked (Ecc 3:17 ).

A serious question arises in Ecc 3:18-21 . This is not a proposition but a heart question: Is there a distinction between man and beast? Bunyan represents Pilgrim in this condition when he had advanced far into his pilgrimage: a darkness on either side of the road; here evil spirits would whisper to him and so impress him that he would question as to whether he did not originate the thought himself. Spurgeon found himself in this condition once. The sin of Solomon doubtless was the cause of his questioning; even so it is with us. The conclusion of Ecc 3:22 is a most natural one. If man dies like a beast and that is the end of all for him, then he can do no better than to make the most of this life.

The author records an observation in Ecc 4:1 and a question which arose therefrom. The oppression of the poor and the question arising was a temporary one, as to whether it would not be better to be dead or never to have been born (Ecc 4:2-3 ). following that is an observation with respect to labor and a question which arose from it. The observation was that a man’s labor and skill were actuated only by rivalry with hia neighbor (Ecc 4:4 ) and the question arising from it is this: Is it not better then, just to be a sluggard? (Ecc 4:5-6 ).

Then in Ecc 4:8 we have an illustration of a miserly bachelor who is never satisfied with -his acquired wealth, notwithstanding that there is no one to whom he might leave his wealth at death. I once knew a man in Austin who had no relatives and owned a great deal of Austin, yet he would go across the street to his neighbor’s to warm rather than buy coal. Ecc 4:9-12 is a contrast with the condition of the bachelor and is a wonderful gem of literature, expressing the advantages of co-operation. Two are better than one because they can be mutually helpful to each other. This is the foundation principle of all partnerships, whether for business, war or the home. “A threefold cord is not quickly broken.” In Ecc 4:13-16 we have an illustration of the same principle in the vanity of kings in acquiring great dominion to be turned over to an ungrateful son. There is doubtless a reference here to Solomon himself and his son, Rehoboam. Solomon foresaw the coming of Rehoboam and his people who would not rejoice in their heritage.

The elements of weakness in human worship as noted in Ecc 5:1-7 are lack of due consideration which results in the sacrifice of fools and rash vowing and then not paying the pledge. Here I give an observation: often let their mouths go off half-cocked and then when settlement day comes say before the messenger, “It was an error.” This principle applies in all our general work. For many years I was an agent for different phases of denominational work and handled thousands of dollars for the kingdom enterprises. On many occasions in our conventions pledges were made for some kingdom interest and when I took the matter up with the different ones for collection many of them would not even answer my letters. Then these same ones would come into the convention again and make another pledge and refuse again to pay it. This led me to go through my list of pledges when they were first made and write after each one of these the German word, nix. One would be astonished to go over these lists because of the great number on the list with nix after the name and also because certain ones are in the list whom a credulous person would not suspect. This experience of mine led me to emphasize very strongly this passage in later years: “Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God.”

Another observation is recorded in Ecc 5:8-9 . This relates to the matter of injustice so often wrought in governmental affairs, but we are admonished to remember that the One who is over all regards, and that his purpose in human government is to secure equal rights to all, since the earth is for all, and all, including the king, must be fed from the field.

QUESTIONS

1. What is the meaning of “Vanity of vanities,” in Ecc 1:2 ?

2. What is the meaning and purpose of the question in Ecc 1:3 ?

3. What is parallel to Ecc 1:4 in modern literature, and what stanza especially fits the teaching here?

4. What are the illustrations of the meaning of the text from the material world?

5. How is the monotony of all this expressed in Ecc 1:8 ?

6. What is the meaning of Ecc 1:9-10 ?

7. What is the meaning of “no remembrance” in Ecc 1:11 ?

8. What are the methods applied in this search for the chief good?

9. What claims does the author make for himself in Ecc 1:12-17 and what is the result as expressed in Ecc 1:18 ?

10. What experiment described in Ecc 2:1-3 and what is the result?

11. What experiments described in Ecc 2:4-11 and what is the result?

12. What comparison is in Ecc 2:12-17 and what are the results?

13. What is his reasoning in Ecc 2:18-23 and to whom does the author refer in Ecc 2:19 ?

14. What is the conclusion of Ecc 2:24 and what is the knock over in Ecc 2:24-26 ?

15. In Ecc 3:1-5:9 we have the elements that limit. What are they?

16. What can you say of the law of opportunes?

17. What great text is here and what its meaning?

18. What is the conclusion in Ecc 3:12 and what the knock over in Ecc 3:13 ?

19. What is the meaning and application of Ecc 3:14-15 ?

20. What awful observation does the author cite in Ecc 3:16 and what is the modification in Ecc 3:17 ?

21. What question arises in Ecc 3:18-21 , what parallels to this in modern times, and what is the real cause of this questioning by Solomon?

22. What is the conclusion of Ecc 3:22 ?

23. What is the observation in Ecc 4:1 and what question arose there from?

24. What is the observation with respect to labor and what question arose from it?

25. What is the illustration given in Ecc 4:8 , what is the author’s observation illustrating this verse and what is the author’s reasoning of Ecc 4:9-12 ?

26. What is the illustration of Ecc 4:13-16 and who the persons primarily referred to?

27. What are the elements of weakness in human worship and what is the applicant?

28. What is the observation in Ecc 5:8-9 and what is the divine element that helps again?

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

Ecc 5:1 Keep thy foot when thou goest to the house of God, and be more ready to hear, than to give the sacrifice of fools: for they consider not that they do evil.

Ver. 1. Keep thy foot, ] q.d., Wouldst thou see more of the world’s vanity than hitherto hath been discoursed? get thee “to the sanctuary,” as David did. Psa 73:17 For as they that walk in a mist see it not so well as those that stand on a hill; so they that have their hands elbow deep in the world cannot so easily discern what they do as those that go a little out from it. To the house of God therefore, to the temple and synagogues, to the churches and oratories steer thy course, take thy way. Only “see to thy feet,” i.e., keep thy senses and affections with all manner of custody, from the mire of wicked and worldly matters. Shoes we have all upon our feet – that is, to speak in St James’s phrase, “filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness” Jam 1:21 in our hearts, that must be put off at God’s school door, as God taught Moses and Joshua. Exo 3:5 Jos 5:15 And Pythagoras, having read Moses belike, taught his scholars as much, when he saith, , Put off thy shoes when thou sacrificest and worshippest. His followers, the Pythagoreans, expounded his meaning, when they would not have men , but , worship God carelessly or by the way, but prepare themselves at home aforehand. And Numa Pompilius, one that had tasted of his learning, would not have men worship the gods , by the by, and for fashion, but , at good leisure, and as making religion their business. a In the law of Moses, the priests were commanded to wash the inwards and the feet of the sacrifice in water. And this was done, , saith Philo, not without a mystery – sc., to teach us to keep our feet clean when we draw nigh to God. Antonius Margarita, in his book of the rites and ceremonies of the Jews, tells us that before their synagogues they have an iron plate, against which they wipe and make clean their shoes before they enter; and that being entered, they sit solemnly there for a season, not once opening their mouths, but considering who it is with whom they have to do. Thus it was wont to be with them; but alate though they come to their synagogues with washen hands and feet, yet for any show of devotion or elevation of spirit, they are as reverent, saith one that was an eyewitness, b as grammar boys are at school when their master is absent: their holiness is the mere outward work itself, being a brainless head and a soulless body. And yet upon the walls of their synagogues they write usually this sentence, by an abbreviature, ” Tephillan belo cauvannah ceguph belo neshamah, ” i.e., A prayer without effection, is like a body without a soul. Solinus report eth of the Cretians, that they do very religiously worship Diana, and that no man may presume to come into her temple but barefooted. c Satan Dei aemulus, The devil is God’s ape. He led these superstitious Ethnics captive, as the Chaldeans did the Egyptians, “naked and barefoot” d Isa 20:2 ; Isa 20:4

When thou goest to the house of God. ] Called “the gate of heaven,” Gen 28:17 such as none but “the righteous” may “enter,” Psa 118:20 the “beauty of holiness,” the place of angels and archangels, the kingdom of God, yea, heaven itself, e as Chrysostom calls it. The French Protestants called their meeting house in Paris paradise. The primitive Christians f called such places , whence kirks, churches, and the Lord’s houses; and basilicas, kingly palaces. Now it is held an uncivil thing to come to the palace of a king with dirty shoes, or to eat at his table with foul hands. Men wash their hands every day of course, but when to dine with a prince, they wash them with balls. So it should be here; when we come to God’s house we should come with the best preparation we can make; we should also be there with the first, and stay till the last, as doorkeepers use to do, which office in God’s house David held a high preferment. Psa 84:10 And while we are there, let our whole deportment be as in the presence of the great God, whom we must look full in the face, and be ready to hear, as those good souls in Act 10:33 ; “Now therefore we are all here present before God,” say they, “to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.” Neither must we hear only with the hearing of the ear, but with the obedience of the heart and life – for so the original word here signifieth; Gen 3:17 , “Because thou hast heard,” that is, obeyed, “the voice of thy wife,” &c. – hearing diligently without distraction, and doing readily without sciscitation.

Than to give the sacrifice of fools, ] i.e., The formalities and external services of profligate professors that think to set off with God for their sins by their sacrifices; for their evil deeds by their good. Hence they burden God’s altar, and even cover it with their sacrifices; sticking in the bark and gnabling upon the shell of holy services, not once piercing to the heart or tasting of the kernel thereof, and are therefore “abominable, because disobedient, and to every good work reprobate.” Tit 1:16 How many are there at this day that not only pray by tale, as Papists do by their beads, but turn over other duties of religion as a mere task, holding only a certain stint of them, as malt horses g do their pace, or mill horses their round, merely out of form and custom, those banes and breaknecks of due devotion! These do not only lose their labour but commit sin, Isa 1:14 compass God with a lie, Hos 11:12 because they wash not their feet before they compass God’s altar. The heathen orator h can tell these fools of the people, Deum non superstitione coli velle, sed pietate, that God requires the heart in all holy duties, and must be served in spirit, Joh 4:24 even toto corde, id est amore summo, more vero, ore fideli, re omni.

“ Hoc non fit verbis: Marce, ut ameris, ama. ” – Martial.

For they consider not that they do evil. ] That they despite him with seeming honours, with displeasing service, which is double dishonour; with seeming sanctity, which is double iniquity, and deserves double damnation. This they so little consider, that they think God is greatly beholden to them, and does them no small wrong that he so little regards and rewards them. Isa 58:3 Mal 3:14 Non sic Deos coluimus ut ille nos vinceret, said that emperor, i going into the field against his enemy. We have not so served the gods, that they should serve us no better than to give the enemy the better of us.

a Plutarch.

b Spec. Europ.

c Buxtorf., Abbreviat., p. 186.

d Aedem numinis praeterquam nudus vestigia nullus licito ingreditur. – Cap. 16.

e A .

f Concil. Laodic., cap. 28.

g A heavy kind of horse used by maltsters; used occas. as a term of abuse.

h Cicero.

i Antonin. Philos. referente Vulcat. – Gal.

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