Bible Commentaries
Ecclesiastes 5

Verses 2-9

XXVI

THE PROLOGUE AND THREE METHODS APPLIED

Ecclesiastes 1:2-5:9

"Vanity of vanities" (Ecclesiastes 1:2) is a Hebraism and means the most utter vanity. Compare "Holy of holies" and "Servant of servants" (Genesis 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 Ecclesiastes 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. Genesis 2:15; Genesis 3:19; Proverbs 14:23).

There is a beautiful parallel to Ecclesiastes 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 (Ecclesiastes 1:5-7) are illustrations of the meaning of the text from the material world. The monotony of all this is expressed in Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 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.

Ecclesiastes 1:11 is an explanation of Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 1:18, thus: "For in much wisdom is much grief; and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow."

The experiment described in Ecclesiastes 2:1-3 is the test of worldly pleasure, with the result that it, too, was vanity. Then in Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 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 (Ecclesiastes 2:18-23). The reference in Ecclesiastes 2:19 is to Rehoboam; Solomon evidently suspected his course. Therefore, the conclusion of Ecclesiastes 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 (Ecclesiastes 2:24-25 f) that it is all from God and that it is all subject to God’s disposal, knocks it over.

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

I. The Divine Elements are,

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

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

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

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

II. The Human Elements are,

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

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

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

4. The elements of weakness in human worship (Ecclesiastes 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" (Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 3:12 is the same as in Ecclesiastes 2:24, but the God thought knocks it over (Ecclesiastes 3:13): "Then I saw that wisdom excelleth folly, as far as light excelleth darkness."

Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 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 (Ecclesiastes 3:17).

A serious question arises in Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 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 (Ecclesiastes 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 (Ecclesiastes 4:4) and the question arising from it is this: Is it not better then, just to be a sluggard? (Ecclesiastes 4:5-6).

Then in Ecclesiastes 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. Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 1:2?

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

3. What is parallel to Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 1:8?

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

7. What is the meaning of "no remembrance" in Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 1:12-17 and what is the result as expressed in Ecclesiastes 1:18?

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

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

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

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

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

15. In Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 3:12 and what the knock over in Ecclesiastes 3:13?

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

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

21. What question arises in Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 3:22?

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

26. What is the illustration of Ecclesiastes 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 Ecclesiastes 5:8-9 and what is the divine element that helps again?

Verses 10-15

XXVII

OTHER METHODS APPLIED

Ecclesiastes 5:10-8:15.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

QUESTIONS

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

2. Why were riches insufficient?

3. What is the conclusion of this matter?

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

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

6. What is the fifth method applied?

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

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

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

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

11. What of anger?

12. What of "the good old days"?

13. What of the advantage of wisdom over wealth?

14. What of the crooked things?

15. What of prosperity and adversity?

16. What of the righteous and the wicked?

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

18. What of things said about you?

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

20. Why is this golden mean unsatisfactory?

21. What is the conclusion of all this?