Utumishi Blog

(apologies at the outset that this is a longer post than most – you might need a mug of fully leaded coffee)

We all know the favourite verses: “A time for everything”, “Remember your Creator in the days of your youth”, “Two are better than one”, “Cast your bread on the waters”. But what if we want not just to pluck verses but to get a grip on the book as a whole?

The theme is pretty clear. The Hebrew word hebel occurs 38 times, 5 times in the second verse of the book and another three times at the other end of the book (12:8). It’s variously translated, more or less literally: breath, vapour, mist, vanity, what is transient, ephemeral, profitless, meaningless. This hebel is total – affecting every sphere of life. You might gain some fleeting enjoyment but there is nothing lasting, nothing you can hold onto, no enduring profit or significance, no quenching of the thirst. The world under the sun is nauseatingly circular or chaotic. There is good but also a pervasive evil, injustice and restlessness. And what frustrates everything is death and decay. Everything returns to dust and is blown away by the wind. In particular two things are brought to nothing – work and wisdom.

Another pretty clear thing is that there are two voices in the book – an editor/compiler/narrator introducing and concluding (1:1-2; 12:8-14) and in between the words of the ‘Preacher’ (Qohelet). Some commentators think the editor is disagreeing with or qualifying the Preacher’s words but in the conclusion he seems to agree with him completely (12:9-10) just as the conclusion of the book of Job somewhat surprisingly endorses the laments of Job.

Structure (based on de Jong and Clemens):

1:1 – Introduction: “The words of the preacher…”
1:2 – The theme: hebel
1:3-11 – Poem: impermanence of life
1:12-4:16 – Observation – “I perceived…”
5:1-9 – Instruction – “Guard your steps…”
5:8-6:12 – Observation – “I have seen…”
6:10-7:22 – Instruction – “It is better… Consider…”
7:23-29 – Observation – “I have tested…”
8:1-9 – Instruction – “Keep the king’s command…”
8:9-9:12 – Observation – “I saw…”
9:7-11:6 – Instruction – “Enjoy life…”
11:7-12:7 – Poem: impermanence of life
12:8 – The theme: hebel
12:9-14 – Conclusion: The words of the preacher

So the main idea and shape of the book is fairly clear – the Preacher looks around him, sees everything is transitory and frustrated and draws some cautious conclusions. But what is this doing in the Christian Bible? How do we handle this book?

Three views:

1.  Everything is meaningless without God but once God is back in the picture then it all makes sense.

In this view, the preacher is first showing the futility of a secular/existentialist/godless viewpoint – everything is dismal and meaningless “under the sun”. Then, towards the end of the book, he brings in God and an eternal perspective – “Remember your Creator” (12:1). Once we know there is a God in heaven and more to life than this world then we can see the meaning of life – to enjoy life, fear God and keep his commandments. Commentators who take something like this view include Eaton and Tidball and it is influential in our context.

The main problem with this view is that God doesn’t just make an appearance at the end – He is there throughout – both in the observation and instruction portions (e.g. 1:13; 2:24-26; 3:10-22; 5:1-7, 18-20; 6:1-2; 7:13-14; 18,20; 8:2, 11-17; 9:1,9). And crucially, as Barry Webb points out, “the verdict of hebel is consistently maintained, whether God’s involvement with the world is on view at a particular point or not. Belief in God does not relieve the observed and experienced fact of hebel.” (Five Festal Garments, p. 95-96). The Preacher is a theist not an atheist and as a good theist that he concludes his sermon with the verdict: “Meaningless” (12:8).

The other problem with this view is that it can tend to suggest that once you are a Christian you will not experience the frustration and pain and evil that Ecclesiastes talks so much about. And that doesn’t fit either with real life or the New Testament.

2.  Everything in this age is groaning under the frustration of the Fall. Our Hope is future.

In this view, the Preacher is a godly man throughout, struggling with the reality of life in a fallen world. The whole book is really an exposition of Genesis 3. It is about life outside the Garden of Eden, under the curse and condemnation, subjected to frustration. David Clemens suggests Hebel could be rendered ‘fallen’ (Themelios 19.3). Some of the pre-fall goodness remains to be enjoyed – in marriage, work and food (cf. Gen. 2) – but everything has been deeply marred and brought under the rule of death and decay.

Even as Christians, this is still the world that we live in – Romans 8:18-25. As Goldsworthy argues in Gospel and Wisdom, Ecclesiastes is an antidote to an over-realised eschatology (all the blessings now) that forces us to deny the reality of the brokenness and frustration and sickness and pain and sin all around us and in us. As Nigel Styles points out (following Goldsworthy) the key thing that makes sense of everything is this eternal perspective of the Judgment Day. So his summary sentence would be, “Everything under the sun is meaningless, but it all matters because God will judge: fear him!” The Christian life is, like Ecclesiastes, about being brutally honest about this world, looking to eternity and the Day of Christ and groaning for that Hope.

This view makes a lot more sense of Ecclesiastes than the first view. The Genesis 3 allusions are clear throughout and the Romans 8:18-25 control is very helpful. The main mark of the Spirit-filled person in this life should be groaning. We shouldn’t expect to escape the frustrations and ambiguity and darkness of this fallen world until Christ returns. Pastorally this is hugely helpful (as Nigel Styles points out in the video above). Ecclesiastes does not allow reality-denying superficial happy clappy Christianity.

All this is to be taken on board as we read and preach Ecclesiastes. However, a question remains, How Christian is the book of Ecclesiastes in itself? Are the answers that the Preacher gives us really gospel answers? Ecclesiastes’ dominant ways of talking about God are as transcendent Creator and Judge. But this is not specifically Christian. Other religions would strongly affirm God as transcendent Creator and Judge. And how are we to deal with this reality of God and judgment? Ecclesiastes urges us to “Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole [duty] of man” (12:13). Is that the gospel?

Certainly in 17th century England the conclusion of Ecclesiastes was taken in a very moralistic direction. A book entitled “The Whole Duty of Man” was hugely influential. In terms rather too familiar in our Kenyan context, it presents the new covenant as a strongly conditional covenant – yes, Jesus has done everything for our forgiveness and complete redemption through his sacrificial death But the benefits purchased by Christ our only ours when we faithfully perform our side of the covenant:

that is, set ourselves heartily to the obeying of every precept of Christ, not going on wilfully in any one sin, but bewailing and forsaking whatever we have formerly been guilty of” (Whole Duty, p. xviii)

J.C. Ryle describes the book as among the “poorest and weakest theological literature in the English language” (Christian Leaders, p. 17) and goes on to quote John Berridge, one of the 18th century revival preachers:

The ‘Whole Duty of Man’ was sent abroad with a good intent, but has failed of its purpose, as all such teaching ever will. Morality has not thriven since its publication and never can thrive, unless founded wholly upon grace… God has shown how little human wit and strength can do to compass reformation. Reason has explored the moral path, planted it with roses, and fenced it round with motives ; but all in vain. (Christian Leaders, p. 240-241)

I’m not for a moment suggesting that any of the advocates of the second view above would want to take things in this direction but in our East African context that is going to be a strong temptation. How do we avoid preaching simply theism and moralism from Ecclesiastes?

3.  The Preacher is a rubbish christ. We need a better one.

This is the view of Glen Scrivener. He has posted on it particularly here and here. I’ll explain his view then underline something that I think is particularly important.

Scrivener starts by taking seriously the description of the Preacher in the first verse: “the son of David, king in Jerusalem.” He is a christ (small ‘c’). But he is not the Spirit-filled Christ of Isaiah 61, he is the one who chases the ruach (Ecc. 1:14; 2:11, 17, 26; 4:4; 6:9). He is not the king of heaven but the king of Jerusalem. He is not The Son, he is under the sun.

Scrivener finds, in common with view 2 above, that the whole of creation is under sin and death, but he adds two further burdens: law and judgment (Ecc. 12:13-14). These are not the good news – they are part of the bad news – the lock down of the world. And crucially, the Preacher-King is under this quadruple lock.

From this position, the Preacher-King doesn’t really have any good news to share with us. The overall tone of the book is unremittingly dismal: Life’s tough and then you die. The logical response is, “Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we die” (cf. 2:24; 3:13; 5:18; 8:7; 9:7). The prospect of a judgment day (Ecc. 11:9) doesn’t relieve the hebel (11:10; 12:8). In fact the Preacher can caution us not to be too righteous (7:16).

What we need then is the true Christ, the true Son of David who can free us from all these things. The gospel is seen in Ecclesiastes, as Scrivener puts it, as in a photo negative. We see the great problems we need saving from and we see that even theism is not the answer – “Christ alone is solid rock, everything else is sinking sand.”

What do we say to this view? Well, perhaps one criticism could be that Scrivener is over-influenced by Luther in drawing a sharp distinction between Law and Promise, Judgment and Salvation. As Styles points out, judgment is often good news in Scripture. And maybe the encouragements to “enjoy life” resonate with other wisdom literature (e.g. Ps. 104:15; Prov. 5:18) and relieve the dark tone a bit. And maybe we should be reminded, from Proverbs, that the “Fear the Lord” is the spring of wisdom.

But basically I think Scrivener is on to something very important. It is interesting that Ecclesiastes always talks of ‘God’ (Elohim) rather than the ‘LORD’ (Yahweh). So actually it doesn’t say, “Fear the LORD”, it says, “Fear God” (5:7; 12:13). Webb thinks this isn’t very significant but I wonder whether it is.

Ecclesiastes seems to be showing the impossibility of knowing the true saving God – the LORD – from the bottom up. The theme of wisdom is very strong in the book. Time and again this wise man – the wisest of them all (1:16) – finds that wisdom, even if it has some temporary use, is very limited, frustrated by death and futility (1:17; 2:12-16; 4;13-16; 6:8; 7:16, 23; 8:17; 9:11-10:1). I wonder whether Ecclesiastes is making the same point that Paul is making in 1 Corinthians 1:20-21 and that Karl Barth rediscovered in the last century, that God is not knowable by man, by wisdom, by philosophy, by ‘natural theology’.

So for example, when the Preacher looks around at Creation he doesn’t learn about Christ (as he should – Ps. 19 cf. Rom. 10:17; 2 Cor. 4:6) but just has some vague awareness that there is a Creator in charge of everything.

Much of what the Preacher says is just human wisdom – simple pragmatism – true enough but not particularly Christian (e.g. “two are better than one”). And his theism doesn’t get him much further.

And when it comes to the afterlife and the possible nature of a future judgment, the Preacher’s wisdom cannot get him clear answers. Barry Webb notes that there is “a stubborn ambiguity which cannot be resolved” (Garments, p. 99). He is simply not clear what is going to happen. If he does go to judgment, what sort of judge will he find? He doesn’t know. He can’t know because human wisdom, even theistic wisdom can’t get at that reality.

“he cannot find out what God has done” (Ecc. 3:11)

“even though a wise man claims to know, he cannot find it out” (Ecc. 8:17)

“I said, “I will be wise”, but it was far from me… and deep, very deep…” (Ecc. 7:23-24)

It’s similar to the poem in Job 28 where we find that true wisdom is beyond the reach of man. To use long words, Ecclesiastes is showing us that all our epistemological and theological foundations are sinking sand. To quote Berridge again:

God has shown how little human wit and strength can do… Reason has explored… but all in vain

In Ecclesiastes, as in the gospel, God is smashing and making foolish the wisdom of the wise (1 Cor. 1:19-20). He is saying, if you work from the bottom up then you’ll just come up with the transcendent Creator God of philosophy or the other monotheist religions. You will never find a God who comes down to save his people, a God whose glory is revealed as he hangs on a cross.

The way out of all this is hinted at in the conclusion of Ecclesiastes – the “One Shepherd” (Ecc. 12:11). As Webb suggests, this is almost certainly a reference to God. But not just ‘God’. By saying ‘shepherd’ the editor of Ecclesiastes is connecting to a rich seam of revelation about the LORD (Psalm 23; Ezek. 34:1-22; Micah 2:12), about David (2 Sam. 7:8; Psalm 78:70-72) and about the new ‘David’ to come (Ezek. 34:23 – where it says “One Shepherd”; Micah 5:4; 7:14).

This One Shepherd is the one who gives true wisdom (Ecc. 12:11). He is the one and only who is at the Father’s side who can make him known (John 1:18). Man cannot know God but in the One Shepherd we have God revealing God to us (1 Cor. 2:10; John 1:18; Matt. 11:25-27).

So maybe I’d add to Glen’s diagram one more burden/lock – that of blindness, hiddenness, the frustration of wisdom, the futility of theism and deism.

But thanks be to God for Jesus Christ our saviour from all this. He doesn’t relieve all the tensions straight away, we will still labour with the frustrations of a fallen world until he returns, but at least we can begin to know the true God – our Father, our elder brother and our comforter – amidst the pain and brokenness. We know the One Shepherd who has laid down his life for the sheep and holds us in his hand and speaks tenderly to us (John 10). In the words of 1 Corinthians 15, we don’t just “eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die” and our labour is “not in vain” because we known the Christ who has broken into history, died for our sins, been buried, risen, and will return and raise us to live with him beyond decay and death in his glory.

Read Full Post »