Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ecclesiastes 6:10
That which hath been is named already, and it is known that it [is] man: neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he.
10. That which hath been is named already ] The maxim is enigmatic. As viewed by many commentators, it asserts that man is the creature of a destiny, which he cannot resist. Long ago, in the far eternity, his name has been written, and what he will be. He cannot plead against the Power that is mightier than himself, i.e. against God. There is nothing left but submission. So taken, the words have a parallel in all utterances in the Bible, or out of it, that assert, or seem to assert, an absolutely predestinating fatalism (Isa 45:9; Act 15:18; Rom 9:20). In such a fatalism, reconciled in some way or other with man’s freedom and responsibility, both the Stoics and Pharisees believed, and so far there would be nothing strange in finding a like maxim in a book which contains so many mingled and heterogeneous elements, both Greek and Jewish, of oscillating thought. There are, however, what seem sufficient reasons for rejecting this interpretation. The word for “already,” which occurs only in this book (chs. Ecc 1:10, Ecc 2:12, Ecc 3:15), is never used of the eternity of the Divine decrees, but, as the passages referred to shew, of that which belongs essentially to human history; that for “mightier,” found in the O. T. only here and in Ezr 4:20; Dan 2:40; Dan 2:42; Dan 4:3; Dan 7:7, is not used, in any of these passages, of God. The sequence of thought leads the writer to dwell on the shortness of man’s life, rather than on its subjection to a destiny. The following explanation gives that sequence more clearly, What he is, long ago his name was called. In the last words we find a reference to Gen 2:7, where the name of Adam (= man) is connected with Adamah (= the ground), as homo was, by older philologists, derived ex humo. The very name of man bore witness to his frailty. This being so, he cannot take his stand in the cause, which one “mightier” than himself pleads against him. Death is that mightier one, and will assert his power. So taken, the thought is continuous and harmonious throughout.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Or, That which has been named – i. e., events past or current, either Ecc 1:9 as they present themselves to man, or Ecc 3:15 as they are ordered by God – was long ago (i. e., was decreed, its nature and place were defined by the Almighty), and was known that it is man; i. e., the course of events shapes the conduct and character of man, so that what he does and suffers is said to be or constitute the man. God from the beginning definitely ordained the course of events external to man, and constituted man in such a way that events materially affect his conduct and his destiny. Hence, God, by withholding from certain people the gift of contentment, and thus subjecting them to vanity, is acting according to the predetermined course of His Providence which man cannot alter (compare Rom 8:20). Others translate, What there is, its name is named long ago and known, that it is man; i. e., What hath been and is, not only came into existence long ago Ecc 1:9; Ecc 3:15, but also has been known and named, and is acknowledged that it, besides other things, is specially man; that man always remains the same, and cannot go beyond his appointed bounds.
Him that is mightier – i. e., God; compare Ecc 9:1; 1Co 10:22, and marginal references.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Ecc 6:10-12
That which hath been is named already, and it is known that it is man.
Solomons dark ideas of life
He says in effect–
I. Fate is fixed. That which hath been. Everything is fate. Most men feel this at times. Do you ever say, I must obey my destiny? It is no use contending with fate. Mine m an unlucky star. There is some truth in this idea. Christ taught a preordination in all events. But His fate was moral, not mechanical; not a blind destiny, but a wise decree.
II. Man is feeble. Neither may he contend with Him that is mightier than he. And Christless humanity is a very feeble thing. His bodily frame is feeble. An insects sting has been known to consign it to dissolution. Mans intellect is feeble; still the human intellect can do something great in connection with Christ.
III. Joy is futile (Ecc 6:11). What the better is man for all he has? What the better for his wealth, his reputation, his philosophy?
IV. Life is fleeting. It is a vain life, and all its days are a shadow. A shadow is the nearest thing to anility. A cloud may catch the eye, and its changing views and figures may give amusement for a few minutes–a shadow, who notes it or records it?
V. The future is enigmatic. Who can tell what shall be after him under the sun? (J. Hamilton, D. D.)
Seeing there be many things that increase vanity, what is man the better?–
How is the adherent vanity of every condition most effectually abated by serious godliness
I. Every condition is clogged with vanity.
1. God never made the world, nor any condition in it, to be a place of rest and satisfaction. And since sin hath so far marred the beauty of the universe, there is a judicial vanity upon the whole creation (Rom 8:20).
2. We know but very little of the true nature of things, nor of ourselves, nor of our temptations, nor of our interests (Job 8:9).
3. That little that we do know of anything, we come so droppingly to the knowledge of it that, ere we can lay things together, so as to compare them, and separate them, and sort them, and compound them, so as if to make a judgment, either things themselves or our circumstances are altered, or upon alteration.
II. All things on this side religion, whereby men endeavour to get above vanity, increase it. The multiplication of cyphers amounts to less than nothing. Can anything of the world supply the soul with grace, satisfy the desires in so much as any one thing, or fill any one faculty of the soul to satisfaction? Can the world fill the mind with heavenly light, or the will with heavenly love, or the conscience with that peace that passeth understanding?
III. It is only serious godliness that can any whit really abate the vanity that cleaves to every condition. To hate sin and love holiness; to live a life of faith, in dependence upon God and resignation to Him; to live above the transports of hopes and fears about things temporal; in short, to be blessings to the world while we live, and to be blessed with God when we die: this is the business and fruit of serious godliness; and this alone is that which at present can effectually abate the vexatious vanities which every condition swarms with.
1. Serious godliness will make your present condition good for you, be it what it will.
2. Serious godliness will make every change of condition good for us, though the change shock both nature and grace.
3. Serious godliness will make relative afflictions (which of all outward afflictions are the most grievous) good for us; and nothing else can do it.
4. Serious godliness will make horror of conscience and Divine desertions good for us.
5. Serious godliness will force something good out of the evil of sin. The rising ground of a dunghill may help to raise thy flight towards heaven.
6. Though to your own apprehension you have no faith at all to believe any one word of all this, nor any skill at all to know what to do; yet serious godliness will make all this good to thee.
Uses:—
1. Set your hears upon serious godliness.
2. Learn to be more than barely contented with your present condition.
3. Make conscience of both sorts of duties,–religious and worldly; and allot fit and distinct times for heavenly and worldly business. But with this difference, let religion mix itself with worldly business, and spare not; but let not the world break in upon religion, lest it spoil it.
4. Whatever you do for the bettering of your condition, follow God, but do not go before Him. (S. Annesley, LL. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 10. That which hath been is named already] The Hebrew of this verse might be translated, “Who is he who is? His name has been already called. And it is known that he is Adam; and that he cannot contend in judgment with him who is stronger than he.”
“What is more excellent than man; yet can he not, in the lawe, get the victory of him that is mightier than he.” – COVERDALE.
ADAM is his name; and it at once points out,
1. His dignity; he was made in the image of God.
2. His fall; he sinned against his Maker and was cast out of Paradise. And
3. His recovery by Christ; the second man (Adam) was the Lord from heaven, and a quickening Spirit.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
This verse is added either as a proof of what he last said concerning the vanity and wandering of insatiable desires, or as a timber instance of the vanity of all things in this life.
That which hath been (or, is, for the Hebrew verb) may be rendered either way, to wit, man considered with all his endowments and enjoyments, whether he be wise or foolish, rich or poor; man, who is the chief of all visible and sublunary beings, for whom they all were made) is named already, to wit, by God, who, presently after his creation, gave him the following name, to signify what his nature and condition was or would be. Heb. What is that which hath been, or is, it is, or hath been named already. Others understand it thus, All the several conditions which men have had or shall have in the world, riches or poverty, &c., are already named, i.e. appointed or determined by Gods unchangeable counsel and invincible providence. But though this be true, it seems not to suit so well with the following clause as the other interpretation doth.
It is known that it is man; this is certain and manifest, that that being which makes all this noise and stir in the world, howsoever magnified by themselves, and sometimes adored by flatterers, and howsoever differenced from or advanced above others, by wisdom, or riches, or the like, is but a man, i.e. a mean earthly mortal and miserable creature, as his very name signifies, which God gave him for this very end, that he might be always sensible of his vain, and base, and miserable estate in this world, and therefore never expect satisfaction or happiness in it.
With him that is mightier than he, i.e. with Almighty God, with whom men are very apt to contend upon every slight occasion, and against whom they are ready to murmur for this vanity, and mortality, and misery of mankind, although they brought it upon themselves by their own sins. So this is seasonably added to prevent the abuse of the foregoing passage.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
10. Part II begins here. Sinceman’s toils are vain, what is the chief good? (Ec6:12). The answer is contained in the rest of the book.
That which hath beenman’svarious circumstances
is named alreadynotonly has existed, Ecc 1:9;Ecc 3:15, but has received itsjust name, “vanity,” long ago,
and it is known thatitvanity
is manHebrew,“Adam,” equivalent to man “of red dust,”as his Creator appropriately named him from his frailty.
neither may he contend,&c. (Ro 9:20).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
That which hath been is named already, and it is known that it [is] man,…. Which may be understood of the first man Adam, who has been, has existed, was produced by the immediate power of God, creating and forming him out of the dust of the earth; was made after the image, and in the likeness of God, a wise and knowing creature, a rich and powerful one, the figure of him that was to come, being the head and representative of all his posterity; and he has been named already, he had his name from the Lord himself, suitable to his nature and formation; he called his name Adam, from “Adamah”, the earth, from whence he was taken; and though he was so wise and great, and even affected deity, which was the snare laid for him by his enemy, it is well known he was but a man, of the earth, earthly, and returned to it again. Some have applied this to the second man, the Lord from heaven, as the ordinary gloss, and Jerom; and render it, “that which shall be”, so the Vulgate Latin version; as yet he was not man, though he had agreed to be and was prophesied of that he should; however be was named already the seed of the woman, Shiloh, Ithiel, the Messiah, or Anointed; hence by Solomon, in allusion to this name, his “name is [said to be] as ointment poured forth”, So 1:3; and as it was known that he should be man, so it is now known that he is really and truly man; though not merely so, but God as well as man; yet as to his human nature his Father is greater and mightier than he; but this sense some interpreters despise and laugh at: and indeed though the whole of it is truth, it does not seem to be the truth of the text, nor suitable to the context: rather the words are to be understood of mankind in general, of all men, not only that have been, but that are or shall be; these were all appointed to come into being by the Lord; they have been in his eternal purposes and decrees, and their names are written or not written in the Lamb’s book of life; and they have all one common name, that of “man”, weak, frail, mortal, wretched man; they are, as is said of the Egyptians, men and not God, Isa 31:3; particularly this is true of persons the most famous that have been in the world; such who have been in ages past, and their names have been called, or they have obtained a name among men, men of renown, that are on the list of fame; such who have been the most famous for wisdom, for riches, for strength, or for power and authority, and have even had deity ascribed to them, and divine worship given them; yet it has been notorious that they were but men, and not God, so Jarchi; and died as such; see Ps 9:20. Moreover, this may be understood of all things relating to men; that all that has been, is, or shall be, has been already named of God, determined and appointed by him; so the Targum renders it,
“all is the decree of the Word of the Lord;”
all things relating to the temporal affairs of men, as to their birth and place of abode, their callings and stations of life; so to their circumstances of poverty or riches, which with all their craving desires and carking cares it is impossible for them to alter, or make them otherwise than they are; which is observed, to check the wandering and insatiable desires of men after worldly things;
neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he; the Lord of the world, as the Targum; not the angel of death, as Jarchi; the devil, which had the power of death, and is stronger than men; nor death itself, as others, against which there is no standing, Ec 8:8
Isa 28:15; but God himself, who is mightier than men, and with whom a creature should not strive or contend; either about his being and the make of it, or concerning his circumstances in the world, that they are not, greater and better than they be; or about God’s decrees concerning these or other things; but quietly submit to his will, and be content in whatsoever circumstances they are, considering that he is the Creator, and a sovereign Being, they are creatures, and dependent on him; and let their circumstances be what they will, wise or unwise, rich or poor, they are but men, and can never rise higher; see Job 9:3. It is observed by the Masorites that this is just the middle of the book.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
“That which hath been, its name hath long ago been named; and it is determined what a man shall be: and he cannot dispute with Him who is stronger than he.” According to the usage of the tense, it would be more correct to translate: That which (at any time) has made its appearance, the name of which was long ago named, i.e., of which the What? and the How? were long ago determined, and, so to speak, formulated. This … does not stand parallel to , Ecc 1:10; for the expression here does not refer to the sphere of that which is done, but of the predetermination. Accordingly, … is also to be understood. Against the accents, inconsistently periodizing and losing sight of the comprehensiveness of … , Hitzig renders: “and it is known that, if one is a man, he cannot contend,” etc., which is impossible for this reason, that cannot be a conditional clause enclosed within the sentence … . Obviously , which in the sense of constat would be a useless waste of words, stands parallel to , and signifies known, viz., previously known, as passive of , in the sense of Zec 14:7; cf. Psa 139:1. Bullock rightly compares Act 15:18. After , asher, like ki, which is more common, may signify “that,” Ecc 8:12; Eze 20:26; but neither “that he is a man” (Knobel, Vaih., Luzz., Hengst., Ginsb.), nor “that he is the man” (Ewald, Elst., Zckler), affords a consistent meaning. As mah after yada’ means quid , so asher after it may mean quod = that which (cf. Dan 8:19, although it does not at all stand in need of proof); and id quod homo est (we cannot render without the expression of a definite conception of time) is intended to mean that the whole being of a man, whether of this one or that one, at all times and on all sides, is previously known; cf. to this pregnant substantival sentence, Ecc 12:13. Against this formation of his nature and of his fate by a higher hand, man cannot utter a word.
The thought in 10b is the same as that at Isa 45:9; Rom 9:20. The Chethb
(Note: With He unpointed, because it is omitted in the Ker , as in like manner in , Ecc 10:3, , Lam 5:18. In the bibl. Rabb., the is noted as superfluous.)
is not inadmissible, for the stronger than man is … . Also might in any case be read: with one who overcomes him, has and manifests the ascendency over him. There is indeed no Hiph. .hpiH found in the language of the Bible (Herzf. and Frst compare , Psa 12:5); but in the Targ., is common; and in the school-language of the Talm., is used of the raising of weighty objections, e.g., Kamma 71 a. The verb, however, especially in the perf., is in the passage before us less appropriate. In lie together the ideas of physical (cf. Gen 43:32; Deu 12:17; Deu 16:5, etc.) and moral inability.
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament
INFERIORITY OF MAN
Verse 10 reaffirms that man is a mere creature of God and cannot contend with his maker, Gen 2:9; Job 9:32.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
4. Reasons why it is useless to strive for riches Ecc. 6:10-12
TEXT 6:1012
10
Whatever exists has already been named, and it is known what man is; for he cannot dispute with him who is stronger than he is.
11
For there are many words which increase futility. What then is the advantage to a man?
12
For who knows what is good for a man during his lifetime, during the few years of his futile life? He will spend them like a shadow. For who can tell a man what will be after him under the sun?
THOUGHT QUESTIONS 6:1012
163.
Man was made from what substance? (Cf. Gen. 2:7)
164.
In what way is man described in Isa. 45:9?
165.
Who is stronger than man?
166.
Can man dispute with God?
167.
What increases when mans words increase?
168.
Does mans ability to speak many words prove to be profitable to him?
169.
Does man have the ability to know what tomorrow holds?
170.
Mans short life is likened unto what?
PARAPHRASE 6:1012
Man cannot contend with God. God is stronger than man. It is well known that God created man from the earth, and man should never forget that. Man knows that whatever he is, he is created and came from the earth. The more man talks, the more evident this truth becomes! Mans much speech betrays his origin and his nature. How does man profit from that? His life is but for a few days, and is compared to a shadowit lengthens and then quickly disappears. Who can tell a man what will be after him in this life marked with such a heavy stamp of meaninglessness and death?
COMMENT 6:1012
Solomon now returns to speak to a theme introduced in Ecc. 1:9-11. This idea has been carried through his book. (Cf. Ecc. 2:12; Ecc. 3:15) The nature of man does not change. Man should know who he is and recognize that his ability to speak long and loud will not change his nature but only compound his futility. He concludes once more that one should simply make the most of the present and not fret over that which is beyond ones control.
Ecc. 6:10 What is man? Whatever he is, he is certainly less than God. Perhaps it is a passing observation, but the Preacher admonishes his readers not to dispute with Him that is stronger than man. The idea that God is Creator is consonant with all the teachings of the book. Direct reference to the fact is made when the Preacher begins to drive home his point like well-driven nails (Cf. Ecc. 12:1; Ecc. 12:11). The relationship that exists between Adam and the fact that Adam was taken from the earth is very close. Gods new creation is called Adam because he is taken from the earth. One has aptly translated the idea into the English with the sentence: His name is earthling because he was taken from the earth. Since this is true, man cannot dispute with God, for he is but the created, not the creator. It would also follow that man depends upon his Creator to empower him to eat of that which he possesses. The discussion here would be an additional argument for the Preachers main thesis: i.e. The gift of God is for a man to enjoy his labor and stay occupied each day with the gladness of his heart. The superiority of God is demonstrated that man can see the futility of trying to find enjoyment without Him. God is definitely the One who is stronger than man and the One with whom man cannot contend.
Ecc. 6:11 Although the NASV translates this idea as many words which increase futility, other translators have offered varying suggestions. One popular translation supplies things for words, and thus suggests that wealth, pleasure, knowledge, all human pursuits along with every endeavor gives credence to the fact that man is subjected to futility. However, these are aspects that have previously been considered. The idea of words offers a different view of man. Now, one can see that the Preacher is saying that even though man is very glib and capable of varying and lengthy speeches, such exercises will only manifest his vanity. Perhaps this tendency on the part of man to demonstrate his futility through his speech was the thought in the Preachers mind when he admonished, 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 (Ecc. 5:2).
We are now confronted with the question: What profit has a man? This may refer to the general approach of the entire book, or it may speak specifically to the immediate context. However, it is obvious that the Preacher is concerned about mans role on this earth and if there is any way in which he can come to the end of the day and honestly say, See, this is my profit for today! It is evident from his previous reasoning that the rich have nothing more than the poor. We are to accept his inquiry then as a sad but true commentary of lifes endeavors. Regardless of what is accumulated, there is no profit to man who lives simply for pleasure itself.
Ecc. 6:12 The first question of this verse has been taken by some to mean that he is not only questioning the meaning of life on the earth, but also the value of life to come. This is out of character with the book, and it is forcing the immediate context into an unwarranted position. He is speaking only to life as it is lived on this earth. Such ideas or terms as futile, under the sun, few years, shadow and his life time, verify this contention.
In answer to his question, the implication of verse ten is that God knows what is good for man. This is the basis for his reasoning in Ecc. 5:18-20. Man is not in a position to determine what is good because he, like that which he desires, is subjected to vanity. His own conclusions, apart from Gods help, will inevitably lead to the frustrating burden of feasting on the wind.
To spend his life like a shadow suggests that it is fleeting. This figure reinforces the idea of a few years. Too much should not be made of the idea that when the sun goes down, the shadow vanishes. However, the concept of living ones life under the sun is interesting in view of the analogy with the shadow. There is a sense in which when the sun sets life is over for all. (Cf. Ecc. 8:13; 1Ch. 29:15) Sufficient comment has already been made concerning the shortness of life and the concurrent emptiness that accompanies it.
The final question of this section is: For who can tell a man what will be after him under the sun? It does not refer to eternity but rather to the activities which shall occur upon the earth tomorrow, the day after that or in the following years. No man knows. Since God is in control of His world and is the One who permits man to enjoy living, then it would follow that man should cease fretting about what might happen and live each day with simple trust and enjoyment. The wise, rich, but yet unhappy man has concerned himself with many problems that pertain to tomorrow: Who will come after him? To whom will he really leave all that he has collected and gathered? What if he has no son to carry on? Will he receive proper burial? What will people think of him when he has died? These and many other questions continually trouble his mind. He is rather required to submit to the power of God and enjoy with moderation the goods of life which God has permitted to accumulate and now potentially at least offer him the ability to enjoy.
FACT QUESTIONS 6:1012
302.
Solomon now returns to what theme?
303.
What is the meaning of the name Adam?
304.
In what way does man depend on God?
305.
Why do many words prove mans futility?
306.
Why is man admonished to guard and select wisely the words he speaks? (Cf. Ecc. 5:2)
307.
What kind of life robs even a rich man of profit?
308.
Give two reasons why Solomon is not writing of eternal life in verse twelve.
309.
Why is man not in a position to determine what is good for himself?
310.
What is meant by man spending his life like a shadow?
311.
What period of time is referred to in the final verse by the phrase after him under the sun?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(10) Of this difficult verse I prefer the translation, What he is his name has been called long ago, and it is known that it is man; neither may he strive, &ci.e., the name given long ago to man (Gen. 2:7) indicates his weakness; neither can he contend with the Almighty. There may be a reference to Gen. 6:3, where a kindred word is used.
Mightier.The word here used is found only in the Chaldee books of the Bible and in later Hebrew.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
10. Koheleth reverts to the matter of wealth, as if asking why it affords no satisfaction. Because of the fixed order which the Almighty has established, and against which it is useless for man to struggle.
That which hath been is named already Rather, was previously called by name.
Him that is mightier That is, the Almighty. “Woe unto him that contendeth with his Maker.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Man Should Not See Himself As Anything Special ( Ecc 6:10-12 ).
The section closes with the warning that man should not see himself as anything special. Like all creatures he was named by God (Gen 1:26). Thus he must beware of setting himself up against the One Who is mightier than he. ‘Man’ is simply one name among many which are applied to what has been seen as futile, the sun (Ecc 1:9; Ecc 1:14; Ecc 2:11; Ecc 2:18 etc), the rivers (Ecc 1:7), the fruit trees (Ecc 2:5), the herds and flocks (Ecc 2:7), man’s labour (Ecc 2:10-11; Ecc 2:19; Ecc 2:22; Ecc 2:24; etc. What then is man? (Psalms 8 has a different perspective on him). What he must recognise is that only God knows what is good for a man in his life (which is but a shadow), and only God can tell him what will be after him.
Ecc 6:10-12
‘Whatever has been, its name has already been called. And it is known that it is (the same for) Man. Nor can he contend with him who is mightier than he. Seeing that there are many words that increase vanity (futility, meaninglessness), what is ‘Man’ the better? For who knows what is good for Man in his life, all the days of his vain life which he spends as a shadow? For who can tell a man what shall be after him under the sun?’
The reference here is back to the creation accounts in Genesis, when all was ‘named’, and man was named Man (Gen 1:26-27; Gen 2:7). Everything that exists originally came into being and was ‘called’ by a name (see Genesis 1). That revealed God’s sovereignty over it. And it is something that has already happened. So all is thus under His control and sovereignty. The same is true of the one who was called ‘Man’. He also was called by a name from the beginning. His name too has already been called. He too is under God’s control and sovereignty. Thus he is unable to strive with the One Who is mightier than he, the One Who named him. In this Man is no different from any other part of creation.
Furthermore there are many ‘words’ that were used of things that were named that he has shown are a part of the meaninglessness of life, ‘the sun’ (the ‘light’ of Gen 1:14) in Ecc 1:5 and often; the rivers (Gen 2:10-14) in Ecc 1:7; the trees of all kinds of fruit (Gen 1:11) in Ecc 2:5; the herds and flocks (Gen 2:20) in Ecc 2:7; man’s labour (Gen 2:15) regularly in Ecclesiastes. Even the ‘breath’ of life (Gen 7:22) in Ecc 3:19. So what is ‘Man’ the better? For none can really declare what is good for man in all the days of his vain and meaningless life which ‘makes like a shadow’, that is as something that is not permanent, as being on the edge of death (1Ch 29:15; Job 8:9; Psa 144:4). Nor can anyone tell what shall be after him. He is merely living a short span, a meaningless part of the time-line, the time-line that goes on everlastingly. He only gains importance when he becomes in touch with God.
So the Preacher closes off the first section of his book on a pessimistic note. But he is talking paradoxically. Outwardly what he says is correct, but he himself has already spoken of what is good for man (Ecc 2:24; Ecc 5:18). Thus there is the struggle within him between the outward meaninglessness of life and the inner meaning that he discerns for the godly man, for the man who lives before God. As a philosopher and thinker he is pessimistic, although as a believer, at least to some extent, he is optimistic. But there is still the problem of death to be taken into account.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Ecc 6:10 That which hath been is named already, and it is known that it [is] man: neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he.
Ver. 10. That which hath been is named already. ] Or thus, That which is the name of it, hath been named already, viz., Ecc 1:2-3 and it is known that it is Adam, or earthly man. The very notation of his name argues him mortal and miserable; whether he be wise or foolish, rich or poor, that alters not the case: – Homo sum, said one, humanum nihil a me alienum puto: I am a man, and therefore may not think strange of misery, whereunto I am born, as the sparks fly upward; Job 5:7 he that forgets not that he is a man, will not take it ill that evil befalls him, a saith another. When Francis, King of France, being held prisoner by Charles V, Emperor of Germany, saw the Emperor’s motto, Plus ultra, More yet, written on the wall of his chamber, he underwrote these words, Hodie mihi, cras tibi: Today is my turn to suffer, tomorrow thine. The Emperor observed it and wrote underneath that, Fateor me esse hominem: I confess I am a man, and therefore subject to misery. b Metellus was by the Romans counted and called Felix, happy; so was Sulla, c but he proved true that holy proverb, “Better is the end of a thing than the beginning,” for he died miserably of the lousy disease, that dashed all his former happiness. The Delphian oracle pronounced one Aglaus, a poor contented Arcadian, the only happy man alive. Solon preferred Tellus the Athenian, and Cleobis, and Bitus also, before rich Croesus, telling him further that he might be called rich and mighty but not blessed, till he had made a happy end; and so confuting his fond conceit of an imaginary felicity. d The Greeks, when they would call a man thrice miserable, they call him thrice a man. e The Hebrews, whereas they name a bee from the order of her working, a grasshopper from devouring, an ant from gnawing, an adamant from strokes bearing, a serpent from curious observing, a horse from neighing, &c, they give man his name Adam, from the dust whereof he was made, and Enoch, sorry-man, sick of a deadly disease, and so no way fit to “contend with God, who is much mightier than he,” to require a reason of his judgments, which are sometimes secret, always just. God hath shut up all persons and things (as it were close prisoners) under vanity, by an irresistible decree. To strive against this stream, and by heaping riches, honours, pleasures, to seek to break prison and to withstand God’s will, is lost labour. Misery need not go to find such out, they run to meet their bane; which yet will – as we say of foul weather – come time enough before it is sent for.
a O , &c. – Isoc.
b Joh. Man., loc. com., p. 175.
c Dictas potius est quam fuerit felix Sulla. – Solin. c. 7.
d Valer. Max., lib. vii., cap. 3.
e T. . – Herodot.
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Ecc 6:10-12
10Whatever exists has already been named, and it is known what man is; for he cannot dispute with him who is stronger than he Isaiah 11 For there are many words which increase futility. What then is the advantage to a man? 12For who knows what is good for a man during his lifetime, during the few years of his futile life? He will spend them like a shadow. For who can tell a man what will be after him under the sun?
Ecc 6:10 named This is either (1) a reference to the naming of the animals by Adam, showing his dominion or authority over them (cf. Gen 2:19-20) or (2) a reference to man being named Adam from the Hebrew Adamah (cf. Gen 2:18-25).
However, in this context it is not the naming of Adam or Adam naming the animals that is the focus, but the repetitive cycle (cf. Ecc 1:9; Ecc 3:15) of humans naming things. This naming was, in a sense, an act of power and authority. Adam had dominion (cf. Gen 1:28-30), but lost it (i.e., Genesis 3).
for he cannot dispute with him who is stronger than he is The him who is stronger can refer to:
1. another human (i.e., one person seeks justice from a physically or socially stronger person, cf. NJB)
2. metaphorically of the cycles of time, which have already named everything (over and over)
3. God (cf. Job 9:32; Job 40:2; Isa 45:9)
Ecc 6:11-12 Human disputation, either with God or one another, cannot solve the problem of meaningless life without hope.
The famous question of Ecclesiastes is, What then is the advantage to a man? This is a repeat of Ecc 1:3; Ecc 2:11; Ecc 2:22; Ecc 3:9; Ecc 5:16! Without a God of justice and mercy there is no joy, benefit, or lasting satisfaction! Life can be good or hard, but what is beyond? Is there a qualitative difference between the fate of a person of faith versus a self-seeking, wicked person?
Human life is fleeting (i.e., like a shadow, cf. Ecc 8:13; 1Ch 29:15; Job 9:9; Job 14:2; Psa 102:11; Psa 109:23; Psa 144:4). Human life is a laborious toil. What does the future hold? This is the question (cf. Ecc 3:22; Ecc 7:14; Ecc 8:7; Ecc 10:14). Is there a fair, just, merciful, unchanging God whose promises can be depended on? This is the faith issue of human existence!
Ecc 6:11 many words which increase futility The INFINITIVE many (BDB 915 I, Hiphil INFINITIVE ABSOLUTE) and the PARTICIPLE increase (BDB 915 I, KB 1176, Hiphil PARTICIPLE) are word plays on the same term, which means, make much or make great.
Israel’s Wisdom tradition counseled speaking few words (cf. Pro 10:19), because words quickly reveal the person’s character and motives.
Ecc 6:12 who Notice there are two questions introduced with who.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
This is a study guide commentary which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
These discussion questions are provided to help you think through the major issues of this section of the book. They are meant to be thought provoking, not definitive.
1. Is this chapter an attack on riches and honor?
2. How can death or non-existence be preferred to life?
3. List the ways this chapter teaches the sovereignty of God.
That which hath been is named already, &c.:
“What is he who hath been? “(Compare Ecc 1:9).
Long ago his name was given;
And it is understood what [that name was,]–
It was Adam”:
which means vegetable mould, made in the likeness of Elohim, Gen 1:27; Gen 2:7; Gen 5:1, Gen 5:2. Made of “earth” he returns to earth (1Co 15:47): i.e. “vanity”. This book is a comment on Psa 144:4. Compare Psalms 39 ; 49 ; 62.
Ecc 6:10-12
Ecc 6:10-12
SOLOMON’S CHARGE THAT LIFE ITSELF IS VAIN
“Whatsoever hath been, the name thereof was given long ago; and it is known what man is; neither can he contend with him that is mightier than he. Seeing there are many things that increase vanity, what is man the better? For who knoweth what is good for man in his life, all the days of his vain life which he spendeth as a shadow? for who can tell a man what shall be after him under the sun?”
The dark and pessimistic tone of these passages might be merely a presentation of what many evil men of his generation were saying, and that Solomon would renounce all of this pessimism in his glorious conclusion (Ecc 12:13-14); and, for Solomon’s sake, we may pray that this is the true explanation of this constant parade of the words `vanity and a striving after the wind,’ words which occur dozens of times in this book. However, in the light of Solomon’s Gargantuan wickedness, we also fear that these passages reveal the secrets of his evil life.
The Anchor Bible entitled these last two verses thus:
MAN’S LIFE IS BOTH FATED AND INCOMPREHENSIBLE
As the words stand in our version, this writer finds the full meaning of this chapter somewhat illusive, in spite of the fact that the radical pessimism is clear enough. Barton supposed that, “Ecc 6:11 is a reference to a dispute between the Pharisees and Sadducees with reference to how far fate influenced the actions of men.” The same scholar affirmed that Ecc 6:12 should be understood as an assertion that, “No one knows what is good for man; because power, possessions, sensual enjoyment and wisdom have been shown to be vanity.” Scott interpreted all three verses as a declaration that, “Everything that is, is predetermined and foreknown. Man cannot alter his fate, or comprehend the meaning of his brief and fleeting life.” Samuel Cox’s comment on Ecc 6:12 is that, “It is impossible for you to know what is good for you to have. That on which you set your heart may prove to be an evil rather than a good when at last you get it.”
Kidner understood the meaning thus: “These verses remind us that we shall not alter the way in which we and our world were made. Those things are already named and known (Ecc 6:10); and that is only another way of saying that the Creation owes its being to the command of God; and that command includes the sentence passed upon Adam and his posterity after the Fall in Eden.” There is utterly no use for man to spend his time complaining about the way things are in this present evil world. We are getting exactly what our progenitors ordered when they elected the devil to be the authority which they chose to obey.
God promised Adam and Eve that in the day they disobeyed God they would surely die. That “day” was the seventh day of Creation (a day that is still in progress. See Hebrews 4.); and not a mere 24-hour period; and man is totally insane if he thinks he shall escape that sentence. It shall yet be executed upon Adam and Eve in the person of their total posterity when the probation of the human race is ended. And at that time, all mankind shall perish, the sole exceptions being those who have been redeemed through the blood of Christ. Read it, Sir! That is what the Bible teaches.
One may inquire, `why does not God end it all at once’? To this it may be replied that, it has been God’s purpose, from the beginning, to redeem a certain number from the Adamic creation unto eternal life and glory. That will be accomplished in God’s appointed time; and then the end will come, but not before then.
Solomon now returns to speak to a theme introduced in Ecc 1:9-11. This idea has been carried through his book. (Cf. Ecc 2:12; Ecc 3:15) The nature of man does not change. Man should know who he is and recognize that his ability to speak long and loud will not change his nature but only compound his futility. He concludes once more that one should simply make the most of the present and not fret over that which is beyond ones control.
Ecc 6:10 What is man? Whatever he is, he is certainly less than God. Perhaps it is a passing observation, but the Preacher admonishes his readers not to dispute with Him that is stronger than man. The idea that God is Creator is consonant with all the teachings of the book. Direct reference to the fact is made when the Preacher begins to drive home his point like well-driven nails (Cf. Ecc 12:1; Ecc 12:11). The relationship that exists between Adam and the fact that Adam was taken from the earth is very close. Gods new creation is called Adam because he is taken from the earth. One has aptly translated the idea into the English with the sentence: His name is earthling because he was taken from the earth. Since this is true, man cannot dispute with God, for he is but the created, not the creator. It would also follow that man depends upon his Creator to empower him to eat of that which he possesses. The discussion here would be an additional argument for the Preachers main thesis: i.e. The gift of God is for a man to enjoy his labor and stay occupied each day with the gladness of his heart. The superiority of God is demonstrated that man can see the futility of trying to find enjoyment without Him. God is definitely the One who is stronger than man and the One with whom man cannot contend.
Ecc 6:11 Although the NASV translates this idea as many words which increase futility, other translators have offered varying suggestions. One popular translation supplies things for words, and thus suggests that wealth, pleasure, knowledge, all human pursuits along with every endeavor gives credence to the fact that man is subjected to futility. However, these are aspects that have previously been considered. The idea of words offers a different view of man. Now, one can see that the Preacher is saying that even though man is very glib and capable of varying and lengthy speeches, such exercises will only manifest his vanity. Perhaps this tendency on the part of man to demonstrate his futility through his speech was the thought in the Preachers mind when he admonished, 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 (Ecc 5:2).
We are now confronted with the question: What profit has a man? This may refer to the general approach of the entire book, or it may speak specifically to the immediate context. However, it is obvious that the Preacher is concerned about mans role on this earth and if there is any way in which he can come to the end of the day and honestly say, See, this is my profit for today! It is evident from his previous reasoning that the rich have nothing more than the poor. We are to accept his inquiry then as a sad but true commentary of lifes endeavors. Regardless of what is accumulated, there is no profit to man who lives simply for pleasure itself.
Ecc 6:12 The first question of this verse has been taken by some to mean that he is not only questioning the meaning of life on the earth, but also the value of life to come. This is out of character with the book, and it is forcing the immediate context into an unwarranted position. He is speaking only to life as it is lived on this earth. Such ideas or terms as futile, under the sun, few years, shadow and his life time, verify this contention.
In answer to his question, the implication of verse ten is that God knows what is good for man. This is the basis for his reasoning in Ecc 5:18-20. Man is not in a position to determine what is good because he, like that which he desires, is subjected to vanity. His own conclusions, apart from Gods help, will inevitably lead to the frustrating burden of feasting on the wind.
To spend his life like a shadow suggests that it is fleeting. This figure reinforces the idea of a few years. Too much should not be made of the idea that when the sun goes down, the shadow vanishes. However, the concept of living ones life under the sun is interesting in view of the analogy with the shadow. There is a sense in which when the sun sets life is over for all. (Cf. Ecc 8:13; 1Ch 29:15) Sufficient comment has already been made concerning the shortness of life and the concurrent emptiness that accompanies it.
The final question of this section is: For who can tell a man what will be after him under the sun? It does not refer to eternity but rather to the activities which shall occur upon the earth tomorrow, the day after that or in the following years. No man knows. Since God is in control of His world and is the One who permits man to enjoy living, then it would follow that man should cease fretting about what might happen and live each day with simple trust and enjoyment. The wise, rich, but yet unhappy man has concerned himself with many problems that pertain to tomorrow: Who will come after him? To whom will he really leave all that he has collected and gathered? What if he has no son to carry on? Will he receive proper burial? What will people think of him when he has died? These and many other questions continually trouble his mind. He is rather required to submit to the power of God and enjoy with moderation the goods of life which God has permitted to accumulate and now potentially at least offer him the ability to enjoy.
Solomon’s Counsel – Ecc 6:1-12
Open It
1. What is something that gives you a real sense of satisfaction in life?
2. Why do you think most people are satisfied or dissatisfied with their life?
Explore It
3. What evil did Solomon notice? (Ecc 6:1-2)
4. What is the main topic of these verses? (Ecc 6:1-12)
5. From this chapter how would you describe Solomons outlook on life? (Ecc 6:1-12)
6. What shocking statement did Solomon make about children? (Ecc 6:3)
7. In what context did Solomon consider a stillborn child better off than a living person? (Ecc 6:5-6)
8. What is true about the fate of all people, including the stillborn? (Ecc 6:6)
9. What is never satisfied? (Ecc 6:7)
10. What question did Solomon ponder concerning the wise person and the fool? (Ecc 6:8)
11. What did Solomon consider to be better than the roving of the appetite? (Ecc 6:9)
12. What conclusions did Solomon reach about people? (Ecc 6:10)
13. What did Solomon conclude about words? (Ecc 6:11)
14. With what question does this chapter conclude? (Ecc 6:12)
Get It
15. Why is it meaningless to have wealth but be unable to enjoy it?
16. Why might the person who earned the wealth be unable to enjoy it, while someone who did not earn is able to enjoy it?
17. How should a person enjoy his or her possessions?
18. When might someone feel as if death was preferable to life?
19. Why is it impossible to satisfy human appetites?
20. How might the abundance of words result in less meaning?
21. What impact does the brevity of life have on you?
Apply It
22. What is something you want to change about your life-style in light of the brevity of life?
23. How can you better enjoy the things that God has given you?
which: Ecc 1:9-11, Ecc 3:15
and it: Gen 3:9, Gen 3:17-19, Job 14:1-4, Psa 39:6, Psa 82:6, Psa 82:7, Psa 103:15
neither: Job 9:3, Job 9:4, Job 9:32, Job 33:13, Job 40:2, Isa 45:9, Isa 45:10, Jer 49:19, Rom 9:19, Rom 9:20
Reciprocal: Exo 8:28 – entreat 2Sa 2:22 – wherefore Job 16:21 – plead
Ecc 6:10. That which hath been Or, that which is, for the Hebrew , may be rendered either way; namely, Man, considered with all his endowments and enjoyments, whether he be wise or foolish, rich or poor; man, who is the chief of all visible and sublunary beings, for whom they all were made, is named already, namely, by God, who immediately after his creation called him Adam, (Gen 5:2,) to signify what his nature and condition were or would be. This verse seems to be added as a further instance of the vanity of all things in this life. And it is known that it is man This is certain and manifest, that that being, which makes all this noise in the world, however magnified by himself, and almost adored by flatterers; and however differenced from, or advanced above others, by wisdom or riches, or such like things, is but a mean, earthly, mortal, and miserable creature, as his very name signifies, which God gave him for this very end, that he might be always sensible of his vain and miserable estate in this world, and therefore never expect satisfaction or happiness from it. Neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he That is, with Almighty God, with whom men are very apt to contend upon every slight occasion; and against whom they are ready to murmur on account of this their vanity, and mortality, and misery, although they brought it upon themselves by their sins. Bishop Patricks interpretation of this obscure verse is very nearly to the same purpose, thus: What if a man have already arrived at great renown, as well as riches, still it is notorious that he is but a man, made out of the dust, and therefore weak and frail, and subject to many disasters; which it is not possible for him, by his most anxious cares, to prevent, or by his power and wealth to throw off when he pleases. This sense, adds he, in a note, seems to me the most simple, and most agreeable to the whole discourse, and it is that which Melancthon hath expressed in these words, Although a man grow famous, yet it is known that he is but a man; and he cannot contend with that which is stronger than himself; that is, he cannot govern events.
6:10 That which hath been is named already, and it is known that it [is] man: neither may he contend with him that is {h} mightier than he.
(h) Meaning, God who will make him feel that he is mortal.
A. God’s Sovereign Foreordination of All Things 6:10-12
In Ecc 6:10-12, Solomon returned to his theme of the immutability and inscrutability of divine providence (i.e., why God allows things to happen as they do; cf. Ecc 1:15; Ecc 3:11; Ecc 3:14; Ecc 3:22). "Named" (Ecc 6:10) refers to the practice of expressing the nature of something by giving it an appropriate name. In the ancient world people recognized that the person who named someone or something was sovereign over it. Thus God "called" what he had created day, heaven, man, etc.; and Adam named the woman, the animals, etc. Solomon’s point in Ecc 6:10 is that God has sovereignly decreed the nature and essence of everything that exists. Consequently it is foolish for man to argue with God about what He has foreordained (Ecc 6:10 b). More arguing only results in more futility for man (Ecc 6:11). Man does not know what is best for him or what his future holds completely (Ecc 6:12). Solomon pointed out that we are ignorant of our place in God’s all-inclusive plan. Even though we have more revelation of God’s plans and purposes than Solomon did, we still are very ignorant of these things.
"The Latin saying Solvitur ambulando (’It is solved by walking’) suggests that some problems are elucidated only as one goes forward in practical action (cf. Isa 30:21; as we go, the Lord guides)." [Note: J. S. Wright, "Ecclesiastes," p. 1173.]
III. THE LIMITATIONS OF Wisdom 6:10-11:6
Clues in the text indicate the value and purpose of Ecc 6:10 to Ecc 11:6. The phrases "does not know" and "cannot discover" occur frequently (Ecc 6:12; Ecc 7:14; Ecc 7:24; Ecc 7:28; Ecc 8:17; Ecc 10:14; Ecc 11:2; Ecc 11:6). Also, the recurrence of "it is good" (Ecc 7:18), and "is better than" (Ecc 7:2; Ecc 7:5; Ecc 9:16; Ecc 9:18), helps us realize that in this section, Solomon gave much practical advice on how to live. He did not let us forget that our understanding of God’s ways in the present (Ecc 7:13; cf. Ecc 8:17) and in the future (Ecc 9:1; Ecc 10:14; Ecc 11:2) is partial. The conclusion is: we should fear God (Ecc 7:18; Ecc 8:12; Ecc 12:13) and seek to please Him (Ecc 7:26; cf. Ecc 2:26).
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)