Text -- Ecclesiastes 5:6 (NET)

5:6 Do not let your mouth cause you to sin, and do not tell the priest, “It was a mistake!” Why make God angry at you so that he would destroy the work of your hands?”

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Wesley: Ecc 5:6

By any rash vow.

Wesley: Ecc 5:6

Thyself, the word flesh being often put for the whole man.

Wesley: Ecc 5:6

The priest or ministers of holy things. Such persons are often called angels, or, as this Hebrew word is commonly rendered, messengers. And this title seems to be given to the priest here, because the vow made to God, was paid to the priest as one standing and acting in God's name and stead, and it belonged to him, as God's angel or ambassador, to discharge persons from their vows when there was just occasion.

Wesley: Ecc 5:6

I did unadvisedly in making such a vow.

Wesley: Ecc 5:6

Why wilt thou provoke God to anger at these frivolous excuses? Destroy - Blast all thy labours, and particularly that work or enterprize for the success whereof thou didst make these vows.

JFB: Ecc 5:6

Vow not with "thy mouth" a vow (for example, fasting), which the lusts of the flesh ("body," Ecc 2:3, Margin) may tempt thee to break (Pro 20:25).

JFB: Ecc 5:6

The "messenger" of God (Job 33:23); minister (Rev 1:20); that is, the priest (Mal 2:7) "before" whom a breach of a vow was to be confessed (Lev 5:4-5). We, Christians, in our vows (for example, at baptism, the Lord's Supper, &c.) vow in the presence of Jesus Christ, "the angel of the covenant" (Mal 3:1), and of ministering angels as witnesses (1Co 11:10; 1Ti 5:21). Extenuate not any breach of them as a slight error.

Clarke: Ecc 5:6

Neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error - Nor think of saying "before the cruel angel, who shall exercise authority over thee in the judgment of the great day, that thou didst it through ignorance."- Chaldee. I believe by the angel nothing else is intended than the priest, whose business it was to take cognizance of vows and offerings. See Lev 5:4, Lev 5:5. In Mal 2:7, the priest is called the "angel of the Lord of hosts."

TSK: Ecc 5:6

thy mouth : Ecc 5:1, Ecc 5:2; Jam 1:26, Jam 3:2

before : Or, ""before the messenger,""hammalach , the priest whose business it was to take cognizance of vows and offerings. Lev 5:4, Lev 5:5; Gen 48:16; Hos 12:4, Hos 12:5; Mal 2:7, Mal 3:1; Act 7:30-35; 1Co 11:10; 1Ti 5:21; Heb 1:14

it was : Lev 5:4-6, Lev 27:9, Lev 27:10

destroy : Hag 1:9-11, Hag 2:14-17; 1Co 3:13-15; 2Jo 1:8

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Ecc 5:6

Suffer not thy mouth ... - i. e., Do not make rash vows which may hereafter be the cause of evasion and prevarication, and remain unfulfilled.

Before the angel - The Septuagint and some other versions render "before the face of God,"meaning a spiritual being representing the presence of God, a minister of divine justice Exo 23:21, such a one as inflicted judgment upon David 2Sa 24:17. Others, with less probability, understand the angel to be a priest, and refer to Mal 2:7.

Poole: Ecc 5:6

Suffer not thy mouth by uttering any rash or foolish vow.

Thy flesh i. e. thyself, the word flesh being oft put for the whole man, as Gen 6:12 Isa 40:5 Rom 3:20 , &c. And it seems to have some emphasis here, and to intimate either,

1. That such vows were made upon fleshly or carnal, and not upon spiritual and religious motives. Or rather,

2. That the flesh or corrupt nature of man, which is oft called flesh , was exceeding prone to set itself at ease and liberty from such bonds, and to neglect the chargeable duties of religion.

The angel either,

1. The blessed angels, the singular number being put for the plural, who are present in the public assemblies in which these vows were generally paid, Psa 66:13 , where they observe both the matter and manner of men’ s religious performances, as appears from 1Co 11:10 , who as they rejoice in the conversion of a sinner, Luk 15:10 , so are displeased with the sins of men, and especially such as are committed in or against the worship of God. Or,

2. Christ, who in the Old Testament is frequently called an angel , as hath been oft noted before, and the Angel of the covenant , Mal 3:1 because even then he acted as God’ s messenger, appearing and speaking to the patriarchs and prophets in his Father’ s name, as a prosignification of his future incarnation, and who is and was in a special manner present in all religious assemblies; and being omniscient and omnipresent, exactly knew and observed all the vows which men made, and whether they did perform or violate them. Or rather,

3. The priest or minister of holy things, who was to require of the people the payment of their vows, to whom all sacrifices for sins of ignorance or errors about vows or other things were to be brought, Lev 5:4,5 . For such persons are oft called angels , or, as this Hebrew word is commonly rendered, messengers , as Job 33:23 Mal 2:7 Rev 1:20 . And this title seems to be given to the priest here, not without some emphasis, because the vow made to God was paid to the priest as one standing and acting in God’ s name and stead, and it belonged to the priest, as God’ s angel or ambassador, to discharge persons from their vows when there was just occasion so to do.

That it was an error I did foolishly and unadvisedly in making such a vow, and therefore I hope God will excuse me, and instead of that which I had vowed, accept of a sacrifice for my ignorance, according to the law for sins of ignorance, Lev 4:2 5:15 Num 15:26 .

Wherefore should God be angry why wilt thou provoke God to anger, at thy voice? either,

1. At the vows which thou hast hastily uttered with thy mouth, as he said above. Or rather,

2. At these frivolous excuses, wherewith thou deludest thy own conscience, and vainly imaginest that thou canst deceive God himself.

Destroy the work of thine hands blast all thy contrivances, and labours, and estate gotten by thy labours, and particularly that work or enterprise for the success whereof thou didst make these vows, which being, as thou thinkest, finished, thou refusest to pay thy vows; but know that God can quickly undo that which thou hast done, and plentifully repay thine indignities and injuries offered to him into thine own bosom.

Haydock: Ecc 5:6

Number. Those who observe dreams, are filled with apprehension. The Jews were very subject to this superstition. (Calmet) ---

As dreams are vain, so are many words or excuses to evade a vow. (Junius; Grotius) ---

Such pretences must not be made. (St. Jerome) (Menochius)

Gill: Ecc 5:6

Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin,.... That is, himself, who is corrupt and depraved; either by making a rash vow, which it is not in his power to keep; or such is the corruption of his nature, and the weakness of the flesh, that he cannot keep it; or by making sinful excuses after he has made the vow, and so is guilty of lying, or false swearing, or other sins of the flesh. Jarchi by "flesh" understands his children, on whom his iniquity may be visited and punished; and the Targum interprets this punishment of the judgment or condemnation of hell; see Pro 20:25;

neither say thou before the angel that it was an error; that it was done ignorantly and through mistake: that it was not intended, and that this was not the meaning of the vow; and therefore desires to be excused performing it, or to offer a sacrifice in lieu of it. Interpreters are divided about the angel before whom such an excuse should not be made. Some think angel is put for angels in general, in whose presence, and before whom, as witnesses, vows are made; and who were signified by the cherubim in the sanctuary, where they were to be performed, and who are present in the worshipping assemblies of saints, where these things are done, 1Ti 5:21; others think the guardian angel is meant, which they suppose every man has; and others that Christ, the Angel of the covenant, is designed, who is in the midst of his people, sees and knows all that is done by them, and will not admit of their excuses; but it is most probable the priest is intended, called the angel, or messenger, of the Lord of hosts, Mal 2:7; to whom such who had made vows applied to be loosed from them, acknowledging their error in making them; or to offer sacrifice for their sin of ignorance, Lev 5:4;

wherefore should God be angry at thy voice; either in making a rash and sinful vow, or in excusing that which was made;

and destroy the work of thine hands? wrought with success, for which the vow was made; and so, instead of its succeeding, is destroyed, and comes to nothing. Vows made by the Jews were chiefly about their houses, or fields, or cattle; see Lev 27:28; and so the destruction suggested may signify the curse that God would bring upon any of these, for excusing or not performing the vow made.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Ecc 5:6

¹ tn Heb “your flesh.” The term בָּשָׂר (basar, “flesh”) is a synecdoche of part (i.e., flesh) for the whole (i.e., whole person), e.g., Gen 2:21; 6:12; Ps 56:4[5]; 65:2[3]; 145:21; Isa 40:5, 6; see HALOT 164 s.v. בָּשָׂר; E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech, 642.

² tc The MT reads הַמַּלְאָךְ (hammal’akh, “messenger”), while the LXX reads τοῦ θεοῦ (tou qeou, “God”) which reflects an alternate textual tradition of הָאֱלֹהִים (ha’elohim, “God”). The textual problem was caused by orthographic confusion between similarly spelled words. The LXX might have been trying to make sense of a difficult expression. The MT is preferred as the original. All the major translations follow the MT except for Moffatt (“God”).

tn Heb “the messenger.” The term מַלְאָךְ (mal’akh, “messenger”) refers to a temple priest (e.g., Mal 2:7; cf. HALOT 585 s.v. מַלְאָךְ 2.b; BDB 521 s.v. מַלְאָךְ 1.c). The priests recorded what Israelite worshipers vowed (Lev 27:14-15). When an Israelite delayed in fulfilling a vow, a priest would remind him to pay what he had vowed. Although the traditional rabbinic view is that Qoheleth refers to an angelic superintendent over the temple, Rashi suggested that it is a temple-official. Translations reflect both views: “his representative” (NAB), “the temple messenger” (NIV), “the messenger” (RSV, NRSV, NASB, MLB, NJPS), “the angel” (KJV, ASV, Douay) and “the angel of God” (NEB).

³ tn The Hebrew noun שְׁגָגָה (shÿgagah) denotes “error; mistake” and refers to a sin of inadvertence or unintentional sin (e.g., Lev 4:2, 22, 27; 5:18; 22:14; Num 15:24-29; 35:11, 15; Josh 20:3, 9; Eccl 5:5; 10:5); see HALOT 1412 s.v. שְׁגָגָה; BDB 993 s.v. שְׁגָגָה. In this case, it refers to a rash vow thoughtlessly made, which the foolish worshiper claims was a mistake (e.g., Prov 20:25).

⁴ tn Heb “at your voice.” This is an example of metonymy (i.e., your voice) of association (i.e., you).

Geneva Bible: Ecc 5:6

Allow not thy mouth to cause thy ^{( d )} flesh to sin; neither say thou before the ^{( e )} angel, that it [was] an error: why should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thy hands?

^{( d )} Do not cause yourself to sin by vowing rashly as they do who make a vow to live unmarried and such like.

^{( e )} That is, before God's messenger when he will examine your doing, as though your ignorance should be a just excuse.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Ecc 5:1-20

1 Vanities in divine service;

8 in murmuring against oppression;

9 and in riches.

18 Joy in riches is the gift of God.

Maclaren: Ecc 5:2-13

Lessons For Worship And For Work

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 any thing before God : for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth; therefore let thy words be few. 3. For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool's voice is known by multitude of words. 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. 5. Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. 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? 7. For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities : but fear thou God. 8. 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. 9. Moreover, the profit of the earth is for all: the king himself is served by the field. 10. He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied with silver; nor he that loveth abundance with increase. This is also vanity. 11. 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? 12. 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.'--Eccles. 5:1-12.

THIS passage is composed of two or perhaps three apparently disconnected sections. The faults in worship referred to in Eccles. 5:1-7 have nothing to do with the legalised robbery of Eccles. 5:8, nor has the demonstration of the folly of covetousness in Eccles. 5:10-12 any connection with either of the preceding subjects. But they are brought into unity, if they are taken as applications in different directions of the bitter truth which the writer sets himself to prove runs through all life. All is vanity.' That principle may even be exemplified in worship, and the obscure Eccles. 5:7 which closes the section about the faults of worship seems to be equivalent to the more familiar close which rings the knell of so many of men's pursuits in this book, This also is vanity.' It stands in the usual form in Eccles. 5:10.

We have in Eccles. 5:1-7 a warning against the faults in worship which make even it to be vanity,' unreal and empty and fruitless. These are of three sorts, arranged, as it were, chronologically. The worshipper is first regarded as going to the house of God, then as presenting his prayers in it, and then as having left it and returned to his ordinary life. The writer has cautions to give concerning conduct before, during, and after public .worship.

Note that, in all three parts of his warnings, his favourite word of condemnation appears as describing the vain worship to which he opposes the right manner. They who fall into the faults condemned are fools.' If that class includes all who mar their worship by such errors, the church which holds them had need to be of huge dimensions; for the faults held up in these ancient words flourish in full luxuriance to-day, and seem to haunt long-established Christianity quite as mischievously as they did long-established Judaism. If we could banish them from our religious assemblies, there would be fewer complaints of the poor results of so much apparently Christian prayer and preaching.

Fruitful and acceptable worship begins before it begins. So our passage commences with the demeanour of the worshipper on his way to the house of God. He is to keep his foot; that is, to go deliberately, thoughtfully, with realisation of what he is about to do. He is to draw near to hear' and to bethink himself, while drawing near, of what his purpose should be.

Our forefathers' Sunday began on Saturday night, and partly for that reason the hallowing influence of it ran over into Monday, at all events. What likelihood is there that much good will come of worship to people who talk politics or scandal right up to the church door? Is reading newspapers in the pews, which they tell us in England is not unknown in America, a good preparation for worshipping God? The heaviest rain runs off parched ground, unless it has been first softened by a gentle fall of moisture. Hearts that have no dew of previous meditation to make them receptive are not likely to drink in much of the showers of blessing which may be falling round them. The formal worshipper who goes to the house of God because it is the hour when he has always gone; the curious worshipper (?) who draws near to hear indeed, but to hear a man, not God; and all the other sorts of mere outward worshippers who make so large a proportion of every Christian congregation--get the lesson they need, to begin with, in this precept.

Note, that right preparation for worship is better than worship itself, if it is that of fools.' Drawing near with the true purpose is better than being near with the wrong one. Note, too, the reason for the vanity of the' sacrifice of fools' is that' they know not'; and why do they not know, but because they did not draw near with the purpose of hearing? Therefore, as the last clause of the verse says, rightly rendered,' they do evil.' All hangs together. No matter how much we frequent the house of God, if we go with unprepared minds and hearts we shall remain ignorant, and because we are so, our sacrifices will be evil.' If the winnowing fan of this principle were applied to our decorous congregations, who dress their bodies for church much more carefully than they do their souls, what a cloud of chaff would fly off!

Then comes the direction for conduct in the act of worship. The same thoughtfulness which kept the foot in coming to, should keep the heart when in, the house of God. His exaltation and our lowliness should check hasty words, blurting out uppermost wishes, or in any way outrunning the sentiments and emotions of prepared hearts. Not that the lesson would .check the fervid flow of real desire. There is a type of calm worship which keeps itself calm because it is cold. Propriety and sobriety are its watchwords--both admirable things, and both dear to tepid Christians. Other people besides the crowds on Pentecost think that men whose lips are fired by the Spirit of God are drunken,' if not with wine, at all events with unwholesome enthusiasm. But the outpourings of a soul filled, not only with the sense that God is in heaven and we on earth, but also with the assurance that He is near to it, and it to Him, are not rash and hasty, however fervid. What is condemned is words which travel faster than thoughts or feelings, or which proceed from hearts that have not been brought into patient submission, or from such as lack reverent realisation of God's majesty; and such faults may attach to the most calm worship, and need not infect the most fervent. Those prayers are not hasty which keep step with the suppliant's desires, when these take the time from God's promises. That mouth is not rash which waits to speak until the ear has heard.

Let thy words be few.' The heathen think that they shall be heard for much speaking.' It needs not to tell our wants in many words to One who knows them altogether, any more than a child needs many when speaking to a father or mother. But few' must be measured by the number of needs and desires. The shortest prayer, which is not animated by a consciousness of need and a throb of desire, is too long; the longest, which is vitalised by these, is short enough. What becomes of the enormous percentage of public and private prayers, which are mere repetitions, said because they are the right thing to say, because everybody always has said them, and not because the man praying really wants the things he asks for, or expects to get them any the more for asking?

Eccles. 5:3 gives a reason for the exhortation, A dream comes through a multitude of business'--when a man is much occupied with any matter, it is apt to haunt his sleeping as well as his waking thoughts. A fool's voice comes through a multitude of words.' The dream is the consequence of the pressure of business, but the fool's voice is the cause, not the consequence, of the gush of words. What, then, is the meaning? Probably that such a gush of words turns, as it were, the voice of the utterer, for the time being, into that of a fool. Voluble prayers, more abundant than devout sentiments or emotions, make the offerer as a fool' and his prayer unacceptable.

The third direction refers to conduct after worship. It lays down the general principle that vows should be paid, and that swiftly. A keen insight into human nature suggests the importance of prompt fulfilment of the vows; for in carrying out resolutions formed under the impulse of the sanctuary, even more than in other departments, delays are dangerous. Many a young heart touched by the truth has resolved to live a Christian life, and has gone out from the house of God and put off and put off till days have thickened into months and years, and the intention has remained unfulfilled for ever. Nothing hardens hearts, stiffens wills, and sears consciences so much as to be brought to the point of melting, and then to cool down into the old shape. All good resolutions and spiritual convictions may be included under the name of vows; and of all it is true that it is better not to have formed them, than to have formed and not performed them,

Eccles. 5:6-7 are obscure. The former seems to refer to the case of a man who vows and then asks that he may be absolved from his vow by the priest or other ecclesiastical authority. His mouth--that is, his spoken promise--leads him into sin, if he does not fulfil it (comp. Deut. 23:21-22). He asks release from his promise on the ground that it is a sin of weakness. The' angel' is best understood as the priest (messenger), as in Malachi 2:7. Such a wriggling out of a vow will bring God's anger; for the voice' which promised what the hand will not perform, sins.

Eccles. 5:7 is variously rendered. The Revised Version supplies at the beginning, This comes to pass,' and goes on through the multitude of dreams and vanities and many words.' But this scarcely bears upon the context, which requires here a reason against rash speech and vows. The meaning seems better given, either by the rearranged text which Delitzsch suggests, In many dreams and many words there are also many vanities' (so, substantially, the Auth. Ver.), or as Wright, following Hitzig, etc., has it, In the multitude of dreams are also vanities, and [in] many words [as well].' The simile of Eccles. 5:3 is recurred to, and the whirling visions of unsubstantial dreams are likened to the rash words of voluble prayers in that both are vanity. Thus the writer reaches his favourite thought, and shows how vanity infects even devotion. The closing injunction to fear God' sets in sharp contrast with faulty outward worship the inner surrender and devotion, which will protect against such empty hypocrisy. If the heart is right, the lips will not be far wrong.

Eccles. 5:8-9 have no direct connection with the preceding, and their connection with the following (Eccles. 5:10-12) is slight. Their meaning is dubious. According to the prevailing view now, the abuses of government in Eccles. 5:8 are those of the period of the writer; and the last clauses do not, as might appear at first reading, console sufferers by the thought that God is above rapacious dignitaries, but bids the readers not be surprised if small officials plunder, since the same corruption goes upwards through all grades of functionaries. With such rotten condition of things is contrasted, in Eccles. 5:9, the happy state of a people living under a patriarchal government, where the king draws his revenues, not from oppression, but from agriculture. The Revised Version gives in its margin this rendering. The connection of these verses with the following may be that they teach the vanity of riches under such a state of society as they describe. What is the use of scraping wealth together when hungry officials are watching' to pounce on it? How much better to be contented with the modest prosperity of a quiet country life! If the translation of Eccles. 5:9 in the Authorised Version and the Revised Version is retained, there is a striking contrast between the rapine of the city, where men live by preying on each other (as they do still to a large extent, for commerce' is often nothing better), and the wholesome natural life of the country, where the kindly earth yields fruit, and one man's gain is not another's loss.

Thus the verses may be connected with the wise depreciation of money which follows. That low estimate is based on three grounds, which great trading nations like England and the United States need to have dinned into their ears. First, no man ever gets enough of worldly wealth. The appetite grows faster than the balance at the banker's. That is so because the desire that is turned to outward wealth really needs something else, and has mistaken its object. God, not money or money's worth, is the satisfying possession. It is so because all appetites, fed on earthly things, increase by gratification, and demand ever larger draughts. The jaded palate needs stronger stimulants. The seasoned opium-eater has to increase his doses to produce the same effects. Second, the race after riches is a race after a phantom, because the more one has of them the more people there spring up to share them. The poor man does with one servant; the rich man has fifty; and his own portion of his wealth is a very small item. His own meal is but a small slice off the immense provisions for which he has the trouble of paying. It is so, thirdly, because in the chase he deranges his physical nature; and when he has got his wealth, it only keeps him awake at night thinking how he shall guard it and keep it safe.

That which costs so much to get, which has so little power to satisfy, which must always be less than the wish of the covetous man, which costs so much to keep, which stuffs pillows with thorns, is surely vanity. Honest work is rewarded by sweet sleep. The old legend told of unslumbering guards who kept the treasure of the golden fruit. The millionaire has to live in a barred house, and to be always on the lookout lest some combination of speculators should pull down his stocks, or some change in the current of population should make his city lots worthless. Black care rides behind the successful man of business. Better to have done a day's work which has earned a night's repose than to be the slave of one's wealth, as all men are who make it their aim and their supreme good. Would that these lessons were printed deep on the hearts of young Englishmen and Americans!

MHCC: Ecc 5:4-8

When a person made engagements rashly, he suffered his mouth to cause his flesh to sin. The case supposes a man coming to the priest, and pretending that his vow was made rashly, and that it would be wrong to fulfil it. Such mockery of God would bring the Divine displeasure, which might blast what was thus unduly kept. We are to keep down the fear of man. Set God before thee; then, if thou seest the oppression of the poor, thou wilt not find fault with Divine Providence; nor think the worse of the institution of magistracy, when thou seest the ends of it thus perverted; nor of religion, when thou seest it will not secure men from suffering wrong. But though oppressors may be secure, God will reckon for all.

Matthew Henry: Ecc 5:4-8

Four things we are exhorted to in these verses: -

I. To be conscientious in paying our vows.

1. A vow is a bond upon the soul (Num 30:2), by which we solemnly oblige ourselves, not only, in general, to do that which we are already bound to do, but, in some particular instances, to do that to do which we were not under any antecedent obligation, whether it respects honouring God or serving the interests of his kingdom among men. When, under the sense of some affliction (Psa 66:14), or in the pursuit of some mercy (1Sa 1:11), thou hast vowed such a vow as this unto God, know that thou hast opened thy mouth unto the Lord and thou canst not go back; therefore, (1.) Pay it; perform what thou hast promised; bring to God what thou hast dedicated and devoted to him: Pay that which thou hast vowed; pay it in full and keep not back any part of the price; pay it in kind, do not alter it or change it, so the law was, Lev 27:10. Have we vowed to give our own selves unto the Lord? Let us then be as good as our word, act in his service, to his glory, and not sacrilegiously alienate ourselves. (2.) Defer not to pay it. If it be in the power of thy hands to pay it today, leave it not till tomorrow; do not beg a day, nor put it off to a more convenient season. By delay the sense of the obligation slackens and cools, and is in danger of wearing off; we thereby discover a loathness and backwardness to perform our vow; and qui non est hodie cras minus aptus erit - he who is not inclined today will be averse tomorrow. The longer it is put off the more difficult it will be to bring ourselves to it; death may not only prevent the payment, but fetch thee to judgment, under the guilt of a broken vow, Psa 76:11.

2. Two reasons are here given why we should speedily and cheerfully pay our vows: - (1.) Because otherwise we affront God; we play the fool with him, as if we designed to put a trick upon him; and God has no pleasure in fools. More is implied than is expressed; the meaning is, He greatly abhors such fools and such foolish dealings. Has he need of fools? No; Be not deceived, God is not mocked, but will surely and severely reckon with those that thus play fast and loose with him. (2.) Because otherwise we wrong ourselves, we lose the benefit of the making of the vow, nay, we incur the penalty for the breach of it; so that it would have been better a great deal not to have vowed, more safe and more to our advantage, than to vow and not to pay. Not to have vowed would have been but an omission, but to vow and not pay incurs the guilt of treachery and perjury; it is lying to God, Act 5:4.

II. To be cautious in making our vows. This is necessary in order to our being conscientious in performing them, Ecc 5:6. 1. We must take heed that we never vow anything that is sinful, or that may be an occasion of sin, for such a vow is ill-made and must be broken. Suffer not thy mouth, by such a vow, to cause thy flesh to sin, as Herod's rash promise caused him to cut off the head of John the Baptist. 2. 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. Hereby, (1.) They shame themselves; for they are forced to say before the angel, It was an error, that either they did not mean or did not consider what they said; and, take it which way you will, it is bad enough. "When thou hast made a vow, do not seek to evade it, nor find excuses to get clear of the obligation of it; say not before the priest, who is called the angel or messenger of the Lord of hosts, that, upon second thoughts, thou hast changed thy mind, and desirest to be absolved from the obligation of thy vow; but stick to it, and do not seek a hole to creep out at."Some by the angel understand the guardian angel which they suppose to attend every man and to inspect what he does. Others understand it of Christ, the Angel of the covenant, who is present with his people in their assemblies, who searches the heart, and cannot be imposed upon; provoke him not, for God's name is in him, and he is represented as strict and jealous, Exo 23:20, Exo 23:21. (2.) They expose themselves to the wrath of God, for he is angry at the voice of those that thus lie unto him with their mouth and flatter him with their tongue, and is displeased at their dissimulation, and destroys the works of their hands, that is, blasts their enterprises, and defeats those purposes which, when they made these vows, they were seeking to God for the success of. If we treacherously cancel the words of our mouths, and revoke our vows, God will justly overthrow our projects, and walk contrary, and at all adventures, with those that thus walk contrary, and at all adventures with him. It is a snare to a man, after vows, to make enquiry.

III. To keep up the fear of God, Ecc 5:7. Many, of old, pretended to know the mind of God by dreams, and were so full of them that they almost made God's people forget his name by their dreams (Jer 23:25, Jer 23:26); and many now perplex themselves with their frightful or odd dreams, or with other people's dreams, as if they foreboded this or the other disaster. Those that heed dreams shall have a multitude of them to fill their heads with; but in them all there are divers vanities, as there are in many words, and the more if we regard them. "They are but like the idle impertinent chat of children and fools, and therefore never heed them; forget them; instead of repeating them lay no stress upon them, draw no disquieting conclusions from them, but fear thou God; have an eye to his sovereign dominion, set him before thee, keep thyself in his love, and be afraid of offending him, and then thou wilt not disturb thyself with foolish dreams."The way not to be dismayed at the signs of heaven, nor afraid of the idols of the heathen, is to fear God as King of nations, Jer 10:2, Jer 10:5, Jer 10:7.

IV. With that to keep down the fear of man, Ecc 5:8. "Set God before thee, and then, if thou seest the oppression of the poor, thou wilt not marvel at the matter, nor find fault with divine Providence, nor think the worse of the institution of magistracy, when thou seest the ends of it thus perverted, nor of religion, when thou seest it will not secure men from suffering wrong."Observe here, 1. A melancholy sight on earth, and such as cannot but trouble every good man that has a sense of justice and a concern for mankind, to see the oppression of the poor because they are poor and cannot defend themselves, and the violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, oppression under colour of law and backed with power. The kingdom in general may have a good government, and yet it may so happen that a particular province may be committed to a bad man, by whose mal-administration justice may be perverted; so hard it is for the wisest of kings, in giving preferments, to be sure of their men; they can but redress the grievance when it appears. 2. A comfortable sight in heaven. When things look thus dismal we may satisfy ourselves with this, (1.) That, though oppressors be high, God is above them, and in that very thing wherein they deal proudly, Exo 18:11. God is higher than the highest of creatures, than the highest of princes, than the king that is higher than Agag (Num 24:7), than the highest angels, the thrones and dominions of the upper world. God is the Most High over all the earth, and his glory is above the heavens; before him princes are worms, the brightest but glow-worms. (2.) That, though oppressors be secure, God has his eye upon them, takes notice of, and will reckon for, all their violent perverting of judgment; he regards, not only sees it but observes it, and keeps it on record, to be called over again; his eyes are upon their ways. See Job 24:23. (3.) That there is a world of angels, for there are higher than they, who are employed by the divine justice for protecting the injured and punishing the injurious. Sennacherib valued himself highly upon his potent army, but one angel proved too hard for him and all his forces. Some, by those that are higher than they understand the great council of the nation, the presidents to whom the princes of the provinces are accountable (Dan 6:2), the senate that receive complaints against the proconsuls, the courts above to which appeals are made from the inferior courts, which are necessary to the good government of a kingdom. Let it be a check to oppressors that perhaps their superiors on earth may call them to an account; however, God the Supreme in heaven will.

Keil-Delitzsch: Ecc 5:4-7

"When thou hast made a vow to God, delay not to fulfil it; for there is no pleasure in fools: that which thou hast vowed fulfil. Better that thou vowest not, than that thou vowest and fulfillest not. Let not thy mouth bring thy body into punishment; and say not before the messenger of God that it was precipitation: why shall God be angry at thy talk, and destroy the work of thy hands? For in many dreams and words there are also many vanities: much rather fear God!"If they abstained, after Shabbath 30 b , from treating the Book of Koheleth as apocryphal, because it begins with תורה דברי (cf. at Ecc 1:3) and closes in the same way, and hence warrants the conclusion that that which lies between will also be תורה דברי , this is in a special manner true of the passage before us regarding the vow which, in thought and expression, is the echo of Deu 23:22-24. Instead of kaashěr tiddor , we find there the words ki tiddor ; instead of lelohim (= lěělohim , always only of the one true God), there we have lahovah ělohěcha ; and instead of al -teahher , there lo teahher . There the reason is: "for the Lord thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee;"here: for there is no pleasure in fools, i.e. , it is not possible that any one, not to speak of God, could have a particular inclination toward fools, who speak in vain, and make promises in which their heart is not, and which they do not keep. Whatever thou vowest, continues Koheleth, fulfil it; it is better (Ewald, §336 a ) that thou vowest not, than to vow and not to pay; for which the Tôra says: "If thou shalt forbear to vow, it shall be no sin in thee"(Deu 23:22). נדר , which, according to the stem-word, denotes first the vow of consecration of setting apart (cogn. Arab. nadar , to separate, נזר , whence נזיר ), the so-called אסר [ vid . Num 30:3], is here a vow in its widest sense; the author, however, may have had, as there, the law (cf. Ecc 5:2-4), especially shalme něděr , in view, i.e. , such peace-offerings as the law does not enjoin, but which the offerer promises (cogn. with the shalme nedavah , i.e. , such as rest on free-will, but not on any obligation arising from a previous promise) from his own inclination, for the event that God may do this or that for him. The verb שׁלּם is not, however, related to this name for sacrifices, as חטּא is to חטּאת , but denotes the fulfilling or discharge as a performance fully accordant with duty. To the expression חטא ... היה (twice occurring in the passage of Deut. referred to above) there is added the warning: let not thy mouth bring thy body into sin. The verb nathan , with Lamed and the inf . following, signifies to allow, to permit, Gen 20:6; Jdg 1:34; Job 31:30. The inf . is with equal right translated: not to bring into punishment; for חטא - the syncop. Hiph . of which, according to an old, and, in the Pentateuch, favourite form, is לחטיא - signifies to sin, and also ( e.g. , Gen 39:9; cf. the play on the word, Hos 8:11) to expiate sin; sin-burdened and guilty, or liable to punishment, mean the same thing. Incorrectly, Ginsburg, Zöck., and others: "Do not suffer thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin;"for (1) the formula: "the flesh sins,"is not in accordance with the formation of O.T. ideas; the N.T., it is true, uses the expression σὰρξ ἁμαρτίας , Rom 8:3, but not ἁμαρτάνουσα , that which sins is not the flesh, but the will determined by the flesh, or by fleshly lust; (2) the mouth here is not merely that which leads to sin, but the person who sins through thoughtless haste, - who, by his haste, brings sin upon his flesh, for this suffers, for the breach of vow, by penalties inflicted by God; the mouth is, like the eye and the hand, a member of the ὃλον τὸ σῶμα (Mat 5:24.), which is here called בשׂר ; the whole man in its sensitive nature (opp. לב , Ecc 2:3; Ecc 11:10; Pro 14:30) has to suffer chastisement on account of that which the mouth hath spoken. Gesen. compares this passage, correctly, with Deu 24:4, for the meaning peccati reum facere ; Isa 29:21 is also similar.

The further warning refers to the lessening of the sin of a rash vow unfulfilled as an unintentional, easily expiable offence: "and say not before the messenger of God that it was a שׁגגה , a sin of weakness."Without doubt hammǎlāch is an official byname of a priest, and that such as was in common use at the time of the author. But as for the rest, it is not easy to make the matter of the warning clear. That it is not easy, may be concluded from this, that with Jewish interpreters it lies remote to think of a priest in the word hammǎlāch . By this word the Targ. understands the angel to whom the execution of the sentence of punishment shall be committed on the day of judgment; Aben Ezra: the angel who writes down all the words of a man; similarly Jerome, after his Jewish teacher. Under this passage Ginsburg has an entire excursus regarding the angels. The lxx and Syr. translate "before God,"as if the words of the text were אל נגד , Psa 138:1, or as if hammalach could of itself mean God, as presenting Himself in history. Supposing that hammalach is the official name of a man, and that of a priest, we appear to be under the necessity of imagining that he who is charged with the obligation of a vow turns to the priest with the desire that he would release him from it, and thus dissolve (bibl. הפיר , Mishnic התּיר ) the vow. But there is no evidence that the priests had the power of releasing from vows. Individual cases in which a husband can dissolve the vow of his wife, and a father the vow of his daughter, are enumerated in Num 30; besides, in the traditional law, we find the sentence: "A vow, which one who makes it repents of, can be dissolved by a learned man ( חכם ), or, where none is present, by three laymen," Bechoroth 36 b ; the matter cannot be settled by any middle person ( שׁליח ), but he who has taken the vow ( הנודר ) must appear personally, Jore deah c . 228, §16. Of the priest as such nothing is said here. Therefore the passage cannot at all be traditionally understood of an official dissolution of an oath. Where the Talm. applies it juristically, Shabbath 32 b , etc., Rashi explains hammalach by gizbar shěl -haqdesh , i.e. , treasurer of the revenues of the sanctuary; and in the Comm . to Koheleth he supposes that some one has publicly resolved on an act of charity ( צדקה ), i.e. , has determined it with himself, and that now the representative of the congregation ( שׁליח ) comes to demand it. But that is altogether fanciful. If we proceed on the idea that liphne hammalach is of the same meaning as liphne hakkohen , Lev 27:8, Lev 27:11; Num 9:6; Num 27:2, etc., we have then to derive the figure from such passages relating to the law of sacrifice as Num 15:22-26, from which the words ki shegagah hi (Num 15:25) originate. We have to suppose that he who has made a vow, and has not kept it, comes to terms with God with an easier and less costly offering, since in the confession ( ודּוּי ) which he makes before the priest he explains that the vow was a shegagah , a declaration that inconsiderately escaped him. The author, in giving it to be understood that under these circumstances the offering of the sacrifice is just the direct contrary of a good work, calls to the conscience of the inconsiderate נודר : why should God be angry on account of thy voice with which thou dost excuse thy sins of omission, and destroy ( vid ., regarding חבּל under Isa 10:27) the work of thy hands ( vid ., under Psa 90:17), for He destroys what thou hast done, and causes to fail what thou purposest? The question with lammah resembles those in Ezr 4:22; Ezr 7:23, and is of the same kind as at Ecc 7:16.; it leads us to consider what a mad self-destruction that would be (Jer 44:7, cf. under Isa 1:5).

The reason for the foregoing admonition now following places the inconsiderate vow under the general rubric of inconsiderate words. We cannot succeed in interpreting Ecc 5:6 [7] (in so far as we do not supply, after the lxx and Syr. with the Targ.: ne credas ; or better, with Ginsburg, היא = it is) without taking one of the vavs in the sense of "also."That the Heb. vav , like the Greek καί , the Lat. et , may have this comparative or intensifying sense rising above that which is purely copulative, is seen from e.g. , Num 9:14, cf. also Jos 14:11. In many cases, it is true, we are not under the necessity of translating vav by "also;"but since the "and"here does not merely externally connect, but expresses correlation of things homogeneous, an "also"or a similar particle involuntarily substitutes itself for the "and," e.g. , Gen 17:20 (Jerome): super Ismael quoque ; Exo 29:8 : filios quoque ; Deu 1:32 : et nec sic quidem credidistis ; Deu 9:8 : nam et in Horeb ; cf. Jos 15:19; 1Sa 25:43; 2Sa 19:25; 1Ki 2:22; 1Ki 11:26; Isa 49:6, "I have also given to thee."But there are also passages in which it cannot be otherwise translated than by "also."We do not reckon among these Psa 31:12, where we do not translate "also my neighbours,"and Amo 4:10, where the words are to be translated, "and that in your nostrils."On the contrary, Isa 32:7 is scarcely otherwise to be translated than "also when the poor maketh good his right,"like 2Sa 1:23, "also in their death they are not divided."In 2Ch 27:5, in like manner, the two vavs are scarcely correlative, but we have, with Keil, to translate, "also in the second and third year."And in Hos 8:6, והוּא , at least according to the punctuation, signifies "also it,"as Jerome translates: ex Israele et ipse est . According to the interpunction of the passage before us, וּד הר is the pred., and thus, with the Venet., is to be translated: "For in many dreams and vanities there are also many words."We could at all events render the vav , as also at Ecc 10:11; Exo 16:6, as vav apod .; but וגו בּרב has not the character of a virtual antecedent, - the meaning of the expression remains as for the rest the same; but Hitzig's objection is of force against it (as also against Ewald's disposition of the words, like the of Symmachus, Jerome, and Luther: "for where there are many dreams, there are also vanities, and many words"), that it does not accord with the connection, which certainly in the first place requires a reason referable to inconsiderate talk, and that the second half is, in fact, erroneous, for between dreams and many words there exists no necessary inward mutual relation. Hitzig, as Knobel before him, seeks to help this, for he explains: "for in many dreams are also vanities, i.e. , things from which nothing comes, and (the like) in many words."But not only is this assumed carrying forward of the ב doubtful, but the principal thing would be made a secondary matter, and would drag heavily. The relation in _Ecc 5:2 is different where vav is that of comparison, and that which is compared follows the comparison. Apparently the text (although the lxx had it before them, as it is before us) has undergone dislocation, and is thus to be arranged: כי ברב חלמת ודברים הרבה והבלים : for in many dreams and many words there are also vanities, i.e. , illusions by which one deceives himself and others. Thus also Bullock renders, but without assigning a reason for it. That dreams are named first, arises from a reference back to Ecc 5:2, according to which they are the images of what a man is externally and mentally busied and engaged with. But the principal stress lies on ודברים הרבה , to which also the too rash, inconsiderate vows belong. The pred. והבלים , however, connects itself with "vanity of vanities,"which is Koheleth's final judgment regarding all that is earthly. The כי following connects itself with the thought lying in 6 a , that much talk, like being much given to dreams, ought to be avoided: it ought not to be; much rather ( imo , Symm. ἀλλά ) fear God, Him before whom one should say nothing, but that which contains in it the whole heart.

Constable: Ecc 2:18--6:10

B. General Observations 2:18-6:9

Thus far Solomon had reflected on the futility of all human endeavor generally (1:3-11) and the futility of human achievement (1:12-15) and his own achievements in particular (2:1-17). Next he turned to an evaluation of labor, his own (2:18-20) as well as that of all other people (2:21-6:9).

Constable: Ecc 5:1--6:10

4. The perishable fruits of labor 5:1-6:9

This section emphasizes the folly of trying to find ultimate satisfaction in one's work. Solomon focused on a variety of situations that involve the fruits of labor: money and what it can buy, fame, and pleasure.

Constable: Ecc 5:2-8

The effect of rash vows 5:1-7

"The sacrifice of fools" in view (v. 1) is a rash vow, as is clear from what follows. Verse 3 seems to compare the verbosity of a fool in making a rash vow to God and the endless dreams one often experiences after a very busy day. Much work generates many dreams, and a fool utters too many words.⁴⁷ If a person makes a rash promise to God and then does not keep it, God may destroy the work of his hands (v. 6). Pleading with the priest ("the messenger of God," v. 6) that the vow was a mistake would not excuse the vow-maker (cf. Deut. 23:21-23).

"Our promise may involve giving to some special work of God or pledging prayer and other support for a missionary. When the representative of the work looks for the fulfillment of our promise, we must not draw back and make an excuse about not having understood what we were required to do."⁴⁸

Verse 7 uses dreams to illustrate emptiness. "Fear God" (v. 7) also occurs in 3:14; 7:18; 8:12, 13; and 12:13.

". . . we should try to put ourselves in a position to discover God's way to use what he has given us in our daily life."⁴⁹

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Ecclesiastes (Book Introduction)

The Hebrew title is Koheleth, which the speaker in it applies to himself (Ecc 1:12), "I, Koheleth, was king over Israel." It means an Assembler or Convener of a meeting and a Preacher to such a meeting. The feminine form of the Hebrew noun, and its construction once (Ecc 7:27) with a feminine verb, show that it not only signifies Solomon, the Preacher to assemblies (in which case it is construed with the verb or noun masculine), but also Divine Wisdom (feminine in Hebrew) speaking by the mouth of the inspired king. In six cases out of seven it is construed with the masculine. Solomon was endowed with inspired wisdom (1Ki 3:5-14; 1Ki 6:11-12; 1Ki 9:1-9; 1Ki 11:9-11), specially fitting him for the task. The Orientals delight in such meetings for grave discourse. Thus the Arabs formerly had an assembly yearly, at Ocadh, for hearing and reciting poems. Compare "Masters of assemblies" (see on Ecc 12:11, also Ecc 12:9). "The Preacher taught the people knowledge," probably viva voce ("orally"); 1Ki 4:34; 1Ki 10:2, 1Ki 10:8, 1Ki 10:24; 2Ch 9:1, 2Ch 9:7, 2Ch 9:23, plainly refer to a somewhat public divan met for literary discussion. So "spake," thrice repeated (1Ki 4:32-33), refers not to written compositions, but to addresses spoken in assemblies convened for the purpose. The Holy Ghost, no doubt, signifies also by the term that Solomon's doctrine is intended for the "great congregation," the Church of all places and ages (Psa 22:25; Psa 49:2-4).

Solomon was plainly the author (Ecc 1:12, Ecc 1:16; Ecc 2:15; Ecc 12:9). That the Rabbins attribute it to Isaiah or Hezekiah is explicable by supposing that one or the other inserted it in the canon. The difference of its style, as compared with Proverbs and Song of Solomon, is due to the difference of subjects, and the different period of his life in which each was written; the Song, in the fervor of his first love to God; Proverbs, about the same time, or somewhat later; but Ecclesiastes in late old age, as the seal and testimony of repentance of his apostasy in the intervening period: Psa 89:30, Psa 89:33 proves his penitence. The substitution of the title Koheleth for Solomon (that is, peace), may imply that, having troubled Israel, meantime he forfeited his name of peace (1Ki 11:14, 1Ki 11:23); but now, having repented, he wishes to be henceforth a Preacher of righteousness. The alleged foreign expressions in the Hebrew may have been easily imported, through the great intercourse there was with other nations during his long reign. Moreover, supposed Chaldaisms may be fragments preserved from the common tongue of which Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, and Arabic were offshoots.

THE SCOPE of Ecclesiastes is to show the vanity of all mere human pursuits, when made the chief end, as contrasted with the real blessedness of true wisdom, that is, religion. The immortality of the soul is dwelt on incidentally, as subsidiary to the main scope. Moses' law took this truth for granted but drew its sanctions of rewards and punishments in accordance with the theocracy, which was under a special providence of God as the temporal King of Israel, from the present life, rather than the future. But after Israel chose an earthly king, God withdrew, in part, His extraordinary providence, so that under Solomon, temporal rewards did not invariably follow virtue, and punishments vice (compare Ecc 2:16; Ecc 3:19; Ecc 4:1; Ecc 5:8; Ecc 7:15; Ecc 8:14; Ecc 9:2, Ecc 9:11). Hence the need arises to show that these anomalies will be rectified hereafter, and this is the grand "conclusion," therefore, of the "whole" book, that, seeing there is a coming judgment, and seeing that present goods do not satisfy the soul, "man's whole duty is to fear God and keep his commandments" (Ecc 12:13-14), and meanwhile, to use, in joyful and serene sobriety, and not abuse, the present life (Ecc 3:12-13).

It is objected that sensual epicurism seems to be inculcated (Ecc 3:12-13, Ecc 3:22, &c.); but it is a contented, thankful enjoyment of God's present gifts that is taught, as opposed to a murmuring, anxious, avaricious spirit, as is proved by Ecc 5:18, compare with Ecc 5:11-15, not making them the chief end of life; not the joy of levity and folly; a misunderstanding which he guards against in Ecc 7:2-6; Ecc 11:9; Ecc 12:1. Again, Ecc 7:16; Ecc 9:2-10, might seem to teach fatalism and skepticism. But these are words put in the mouth of an objector; or rather, they were the language of Solomon himself during his apostasy, finding an echo in the heart of every sensualist, who wishes to be an unbeliever, and, who, therefore, sees difficulties enough in the world around wherewith to prop up his wilful unbelief. The answer is given (Ecc 7:17-18; Ecc 9:11-12; Ecc 11:1, Ecc 11:6; Ecc 12:13). Even if these passages be taken as words of Solomon, they are to be understood as forbidding a self-made "righteousness," which tries to constrain God to grant salvation to imaginary good works and external strictness with which it wearies itself; also, that speculation which tries to fathom all God's inscrutable counsels (Ecc 8:17), and that carefulness about the future forbidden in Mat 6:25.

THE CHIEF GOOD is that the possession of that which makes us happy, is to be sought as the end, for its own sake; whereas, all other things are but means towards it. Philosophers, who made it the great subject of inquiry, restricted it to the present life, treating the eternal as unreal, and only useful to awe the multitude with. But Solomon shows the vanity of all human things (so-called philosophy included) to satisfy the soul, and that heavenly wisdom alone is the chief good. He had taught so when young (Pro 1:20; Pro 8:1); so also; in Song of Solomon, he had spiritualized the subject in an allegory; and now, after having long personally tried the manifold ways in which the worldly seek to reach happiness, he gives the fruit of his experience in old age.

It is divided into two parts-- Ecc. 1:1-6:10 showing the vanity of earthly things; Ecc. 6:10-12:14, the excellence of heavenly wisdom. Deviations from strict logical methods occur in these divisions, but in the main they are observed. The deviations make it the less stiff and artificial, and the more suited to all capacities. It is in poetry; the hemistichal division is mostly observed, but occasionally not so. The choice of epithets, imagery, inverted order of words, ellipses, parallelism, or, in its absence, similarity of diction, mark versification.

JFB: Ecclesiastes (Outline)

• INTRODUCTION. (Ecc. 1:1-18)

TSK: Ecclesiastes 5 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Ecc 5:1, Vanities in divine service; Ecc 5:8, in murmuring against oppression; Ecc 5:9, and in riches; Ecc 5:18, Joy in riches is the gift of God.

Poole: Ecclesiastes 5 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 5

Vanities in divine matters, Ecc 5:1-7 . In murmuring and repining, Ecc 5:8 . In riches and covetousness. Ecc 5:9,10 ; for riches rob men of ease, Ecc 5:11,12 , procure their death, Ecc 5:13 , fly away, Ecc 5:14 , cannot be carried with them into the grave, Ecc 5:15-17 . A contented life best: this is the gift of God, Ecc 5:18-20 .

The seven first verses of this chapter are inserted partly as the only effectual remedy against all the foregoing vanities, and partly as a caution to take heed of bringing vanity into the service of God, or of worshipping God vainly and foolishly.

MHCC: Ecclesiastes (Book Introduction)

The name of this book signifies " The Preacher." The wisdom of God here preaches to us, speaking by Solomon, who it is evident was the author. At the close of his life, being made sensible of his sin and folly, he recorded here his experience for the benefit of others, as the book of his repentance; and he pronounced all earthly good to be " vanity and vexation of spirit." It convinces us of the vanity of the world, and that it cannot make us happy; of the vileness of sin, and its certain tendency to make us miserable. It shows that no created good can satisfy the soul, and that happiness is to be found in God alone; and this doctrine must, under the blessed Spirit's teaching, lead the heart to Christ Jesus.

MHCC: Ecclesiastes 5 (Chapter Introduction)

(Ecc 5:1-3) What renders devotion vain.

(Ecc 5:4-8) Of vows, and oppression.

(Ecc 5:9-17) The vanity of riches shown.

(Ecc 5:18-20) The right use of riches.

Matthew Henry: Ecclesiastes (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Book of Ecclesiastes

We are still among Solomon's happy men, his happy servants, that stood continually before him to hear his wisdom; and they are the choicest of all the dictates of his wisdom, such as were more immediately given by divine inspiration, that are here transmitted to us, not to be heard, as by them, but once, and then liable to be mistaken or forgotten, and by repetition to lose their beauty, but to be read, reviewed, revolved, and had in everlasting remembrance. The account we have of Solomon's apostasy from God, in the latter end of his reign (1Ki 11:1), is the tragical part of his story; we may suppose that he spoke his Proverbs in the prime of his time, while he kept his integrity, but delivered his Ecclesiastes when he had grown old (for of the burdens and decays of age he speaks feelingly Ecc 12:1-14), and was, by the grace of God, recovered from his backslidings. There he dictated his observations; here he wrote his own experiences; this is what days speak, and wisdom which the multitude of years teaches. The title of the book and the penman we shall meet with in the first verse, and therefore shall here only observe,

I. That it is a sermon, a sermon in print; the text is (Ecc 1:2), Vanity of vanities, all is vanity; that is the doctrine too; it is proved at large by many arguments and an induction of particulars, and divers objections are answered, and in the close we have the use and application of all, by way of exhortation, to remember our Creator, to fear him, and to keep his commandments. There are indeed many things in this book which are dark and hard to be understood, and some things which men of corrupt minds wrest to their own destruction, for want of distinguishing between Solomon's arguments and the objections of atheists and epicures; but there is enough easy and plain to convince us (if we will admit the conviction) of the vanity of the world, and its utter insufficiency to make us happy, the vileness of sin, and its certain tendency to make us miserable, and of the wisdom of being religious, and the solid comfort and satisfaction that are to be had in doing our duty both to God and man. This should be intended in every sermon, and that is a good sermon by which these points are in any measure gained. II. That it is a penitential sermon, as some of David's psalms are penitential psalms; it is a recantation-sermon, in which the preacher sadly laments his own folly and mistake, in promising himself satisfaction in the things of this world, and even in the forbidden pleasures of sense, which now he finds more bitter than death. His fall is a proof of the weakness of man's nature: Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, nor say, " I shall never be such a fool as to do so and so," when Solomon himself, the wisest of men, played the fool so egregiously; nor let the rich man glory in his riches, since Solomon's wealth was so great a snare to him, and did him a great deal more hurt than Job's poverty did him. His recovery is a proof of the power of God's grace, in bringing one back to God that has gone so far from him; it is a proof too of the riches of God's mercy in accepting him notwithstanding the many aggravations of his sin, pursuant to the promise made to David, that if his children should commit iniquity they should be corrected, but not abandoned and disinherited, 2Sa 7:14, 2Sa 7:15. Let him therefore that thinks he stands take heed lest he fall; and let him that has fallen make haste to get up again, and not despair either of assistance or acceptance therein. III. That it is a practical profitable sermon. Solomon, being brought to repentance, resolves, like his father, to teach transgressors God's way (Psa 51:13) and to give warning to all to take heed of splitting upon those rocks which had been fatal to him; and these were fruits meet for repentance. The fundamental error of the children of men, and that which is at the bottom of all their departures from God, is the same with that of our first parents, hoping to be as gods by entertaining themselves with that which seems good for food, pleasant to the eyes, and desirable to make one wise. Now the scope of this book is to show that this is a great mistake, that our happiness consists not in being as gods to ourselves, to have what we will and do what we will, but in having him that made us to be a God to us. The moral philosophers disputed much about man's felicity, or chief good. Various opinions they had about it; but Solomon, in this book, determines the question, and assures us that to fear God and to keep his commandments is the whole of man. He tried what satisfaction might be found in the wealth of the world and the pleasures of sense, and at last pronounced all vanity and vexation; yet multitudes will not take his word, but will make the same dangerous experiment, and it proves fatal to them. He, 1. Shows the vanity of those things in which men commonly look for happiness, as human learning and policy, sensual delight, honour and power, riches and great possessions. And then, 2. He prescribes remedies against the vexation of spirit that attends them. Though we cannot cure them of their vanity, we may prevent the trouble they give us, by sitting loose to them, enjoying them comfortable, but laying our expectations low from them, and acquiescing in the will of God concerning us in every event, especially by remembering God in the days of our youth, and continuing in his fear and service all our days, with an eye to the judgment to come.

Matthew Henry: Ecclesiastes 5 (Chapter Introduction)

Solomon, in this chapter, discourses, I. Concerning the worship of God, prescribing that as a remedy against all those vanities which he had already observed to be in wisdom, learning, pleasure, honour, power, and business. That we may not be deceived by those things, nor have our spirits vexed with the disappointments we meet with in them, let us make conscience of our duty to God and keep up our communion with him; but, withal, he gives a necessary caution against the vanities which are to often found in religious exercises, which deprive them of their excellency and render them unable to help against other vanities. If our religion be a vain religion, how great is that vanity! Let us therefore take heed of vanity, 1. In hearing the word, and offering sacrifice (Ecc 5:1). 2. In prayer (Ecc 5:2, Ecc 5:3). 3. In making vows (Ecc 5:4-6). 4. In pretending to divine dreams (Ecc 5:7). Now, (1.) For a remedy against those vanities, he prescribes the fear of God (Ecc 5:7). (2.) To prevent the offence that might arise from the present sufferings of good people, he directs us to look up to God (Ecc 5:8). II. Concerning the wealth of this world and the vanity and vexation that attend it. The fruits of the earth indeed are necessary to the support of life (Ecc 5:9), but as for silver, and gold, and riches, 1. They are unsatisfying (Ecc 5:10). 2. They are unprofitable (Ecc 5:11). 3. They are disquieting (Ecc 5:12). 4. They often prove hurtful and destroying (Ecc 5:13). 5. They are perishing (Ecc 5:14). 6. They must be left behind when we die (Ecc 5:15, Ecc 5:16). 7. If we have not a heart to make use of them, they occasion a great deal of uneasiness (Ecc 5:17). And therefore he recommends to us the comfortable use of that which God has given us, with an eye to him that is the giver, as the best way both to answer the end of our having it and to obviate the mischiefs that commonly attend great estates (Ecc 5:18-20). So that if we can but learn out of this chapter how to manage the business of religion, and the business of this world (which two take up most of our time), so that both may turn to a good account, and neither our sabbath days nor our week-days may be lost, we shall have reason to say, We have learned two good lessons.

Constable: Ecclesiastes (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The title of this book in the Hebrew text is all of verse 1. The Septuagint translation (third century B.C.) gave it the name "Ekklesiastes" from which the English title is a transliteration. This word is the Greek translation of the Hebrew word qohelet that the NASB translated "Preacher" in verse 1. The Hebrew word designates a leader who speaks before an assembly of people. The NIV translation "Teacher" is also a good one.

Writer and Date

The commentators sometimes treat the Hebrew word qohelet ("Preacher"; 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10) as a proper name.¹ However the fact that the article is present on the Hebrew word in 12:8, and perhaps in 7:27, seems to indicate that qohelet is a title: "the preacher" or "the teacher."

Internal references point to Solomon as this preacher (cf. 1:1, 12-2:26; 2:4-9; 12:9). Both Jewish and Christian interpreters believed Solomon was the writer until the eighteenth century. With the rise of literary and historical Bible criticism a widespread rejection of Solomonic authorship set in. Rejection of Solomonic authorship rests mainly on linguistic factors (vocabulary and syntax) that some scholars feel were more characteristic of a time much later than Solomon's, namely, about 450-250 B.C.² Conservative scholars have refuted this linguistic argument.³ Several more or less conservative scholars have rejected Solomonic authorship.⁴ Yet there is no information in the Bible that would eliminate Solomon as the writer.

Assuming that Solomon wrote the book in its entirety, he must have done so during his lifetime and probably during his reign (971-931 B.C.). It has seemed probable to some expositors that he may have written Song of Solomon in his youth, Proverbs in his middle life, and Ecclesiastes in his old age (cf. 2:1-11; 11:9; 12:1). This theory rests on the contents of the three inspired Bible books that he evidently wrote, specifically clues in these books about the age of their writer.

"Ecclesiastes is best placed after his apostasy, when both his recent turmoil and repentance were still fresh in his mind."⁵

Purpose

This book helps the reader develop a God-centered worldview and recognize the dangers of a self-centered worldview. It does not describe the life of faith or teach what the responsibilities of faith in God are. It also prescribes the limits of human philosophy (cf. 3:11; 8:16-17). The book teaches that people are accountable to God and that we should avoid self-indulgence that leads to the exploitation of others for selfish gain.

"Christians may ask how the stress on using and enjoying life tallies with the NT command Do not love the world' (1 John 2:15). The answer is that the Teacher (Ecclesiastes) would have agreed fully with John's next statement that everything in the world--the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does--comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away' (vv. 16-17). One could hardly find a better statement than this of the whole theme of Ecclesiastes (e.g., 2:1-11; 5:10). Life in the world has significance only when man remembers his Creator (12:1).

"There always have been two kinds of teaching about the way to holiness. One is by withdrawal as far as possible from the natural in order to promote the spiritual. The other is to use and transform the natural into the expression of the spiritual. While each kind of teaching has its place, some people need one emphasis rather than the other. Ecclesiastes definitely teaches the second."⁶

"Ecclesiastes does not pretend to preach the Gospel. Rather, it encourages the reader to a God-centered worldview rather than falling victim to frustrations and unanswered questions. None of its contents has to be rejected in the light of the NT. Although the NT revelation is vastly greater than that in Ecclesiastes, the two are not devoid of similarities (e.g., James 4:13-17). Like the people of God in Solomon's time, believers today are subject to the unexpected changes and chances common to mankind. Yet they know that God works through every vicissitude of life. Respecting the future, which for Solomon was shrouded in a shadow land, Christians have the glorious hope of being in the presence of Christ himself (2 Cor 5:6; Phil 1:23)."⁷

Message⁸

I believe that the message of Ecclesiastes is essentially a positive one. This may seem strange since the vanity of various human endeavors is such a major theme of this book. Nevertheless the total statement that Solomon made was positive.

He was saying, I believe, that even though every human endeavor lacks ultimate value, we should live life in the fear of God (i.e., with the proper recognition of Him). Furthermore we should enjoy life maximally as a gift from God. Ecclesiastes 12:13 is very similar to Proverbs 1:7 and 3:5-6. In both these books, as well as in Job, the fear of God is the prerequisite for successful living here and now.

The difference between Ecclesiastes and Proverbs is that in Ecclesiastes the emphasis is on the inability of every human endeavor to provide ultimate value. In Proverbs the emphasis is on the comparative value of living in the fear of God.

Solomon's attitude is very important for us to grasp to understand this book. He never lost sight of God's existence. He was not an atheist or even an apostate. The fact that Solomon kept God in view throughout the book enabled him to see that all is vanity under the sun. The person who disregards God does not say that. For him what is under the sun is all that is meaningful.

I do not believe Solomon did everything he said he did in rebellion against God. Some things were acts of disobedience, but many other things were experiments in living designed to discover the relative value of various experiences.

The major revelations of the book are three.

First, Ecclesiastes reveals that every human endeavor lacks ultimate value. All is vanity in that sense.

Solomon stated this thesis in 1:2.

Then Solomon supported his thesis with examples he took from nature (1:3-11).

Next Solomon appealed to various human achievements to apply his thesis. He did this first by citing his own personal experiments and observations on this subject (1:12-2:17). Then he referred to facts observable by all people that confirm the same conclusion (2:18-6:9).

Solomon next showed that every human endeavor lacks ultimate value by reminding us of the limits of human wisdom (6:10-11:6). He supported these assertions also with empirical evidence (what people experience generally in life). God's will will indeed happen. However man does not know God's plan fully. Therefore man does not know exactly what will happen.

The second major revelation of this book is that people should live life in the fear of God and enjoy life as much as they can. This is really Solomon's practical conclusion to the truthfulness of the thesis that he proved in 1:3-11:6.

Since death is coming we should enjoy life now, not in disregard for God, but in the fear of God (11:7-8).

We should enjoy life in our youth while at the same time remembering that God will judge our lives (11:9-10). Moreover we should behave responsibly in our youth since old age is coming (12:1-7).

The third major revelation of the book is its statement of what true wisdom is (12:13). God intends people to rejoice, but to remember God and to live with recognition of Him (cf. Prov. 3:5-6). Failing to fear God will result in a life of vanity. To fear God and live in harmony with His will will result in a life of fullness.

Let me point out some implications of the teaching of this book.

Conviction results in conduct that produces character. That is a basic reality of life regardless of what one's convictions may be. When we have a conviction that God exists and we live under His loving authority, our conduct will be obedience to His will. Furthermore responsibility and joy will mark our character. However if we believe that God either does not exist or is not worth consideration, our conduct will be disregard of His will, and vanity will mark our character.

To dethrone God is to lose the key to life. We may pursue many human endeavors, but all we will find is vanity, lack of ultimate fulfillment. On the other hand if we enthrone God we will enter into the fullness of life (John 17:3; Ps. 16:11).

Outline⁹

I. The introductory affirmation 1:1-11

A. Title and theme 1:1-2

1. The title 1:1

2. The theme 1:2

B. The futility of all human endeavor 1:3-11

1. The vanity of work 1:3

2. The illustrations from life 1:4-11

II. The futility of work 1:12-6:9

A. Personal observations 1:12-2:17

1. Solomon's investigation of human achievement 1:12-15

2. Solomon's evaluation of his investigation of human achievement 1:16-18

3. Solomon's investigation of pleasure 2:1-11

4. Solomon's evaluation of his investigation of pleasure 2:12-17

B. General observations 2:18-6:9

1. The outcome of labor 2:18-26

2. Labor and divine providence 3:1-4:3

3. The motivations of labor 4:4-16

4. The perishable fruits of labor 5:1-6:9

III. The limitations of wisdom 6:10-11:6

A. God's sovereign foreordination of all things 6:10-12

B. God's inscrutable plan chs. 7-8

1. Adversity and prosperity 7:1-14

2. Righteousness and wickedness 7:15-27

3. The value and limitations of wisdom ch. 8

C. Man's ignorance of the future 9:1-11:6

1. The future of the righteous on earth 9:1-10

2. The future of the wise on earth 9:11-10:11

3. The folly of criticism in view of the uncertain future 10:12-20

4. Wise behavior in view of the uncertain future 11:1-6

IV. The way of wisdom 11:7-12:14

A. Joyous and responsible living 11:7-12:7

1. Joyful living 11:7-10

2. Responsible living 12:1-7

B. The concluding summary 12:8-14

Constable: Ecclesiastes

Ecclesiastes

Bibliography

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. "The Linguistic Evidence for the Date of Ecclesiastes'." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 12:3 (Summer 1969):167-81.

Barton, G. A. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes. International Critical Commentary series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1908.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan, and Scott, 1965.

Breton, Santiago. "Qoheleth Studies." Biblical Theology Bulletin 3 (1973):22-50.

Brindle, Wayne A. "Righteousness and Wickedness in Ecclesiastes 7:15-18." Andrews University Seminary Studies 23:3 (Autumn 1985):243-57.

Bullock, C. Hassell. An Introduction to the Poetic Books of the Old Testament. Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.

Caneday, Ardel B. "Qoheleth: Enigmatic Pessimist or Godly Sage?" Grace Theological Journal 7:1 (Spring 1986):21-56.

Cohen, A. The Five Megilloth. London: Soncino Press, 1946.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--Old Testament." Paper submitted for course 685 Analysis of Bible Books--Old Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1967.

Crenshaw, James L. "The Acquisition of Knowledge in Israelite Wisdom Literature." Word & World 7:3 (Summer 1987):245-52.

_____. Old Testament Wisdom. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1981.

_____. "Popular Questioning of the Justice of God in Ancient Israel." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 82:3 (1970):380-95.

_____. "The Shadow of Death in Qoheleth." In Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, pp. 205-16. Edited by John G. Gammie, Walter A. Brueggemann, W. Lee Humphreys, and James M. Ward. New York: Union Theological Seminary, 1978.

_____. "Youth and Old Age in Qoheleth." Hebrew Annual Review 10 (1986):1-12.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Davis, Barry C. "Ecclesiastes 12:1-8--Death, an Impetus for Life." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:591 (July-September 1991):298-318.

Delitzsch, Franz. Bibilical Commentary on the Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes. Translated by M. G. Eason. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Dreese, John J. "The Theology of Qoheleth." The Bible Today 56 (November 1971):513-18.

Eaton, Michael A. Ecclesiastes. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries series. Leicester, Eng., and Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1983.

Forman, Charles C. "Koheleth's Use of Genesis." Journal of Semitic Studies 5 (1960):256-63.

Fox, Michael V. "The Meaning of Hebel for Qoheleth." Journal of Biblical Literature 105:3 (September 1986):409-27.

_____. Qohelet and His Contradictions. Sheffield, Eng.: Almond Press, 1989.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Genung, John F. Words of Koheleth. New York: Houghton, Mifflin, 1904.

Ginsburg, Christian D. Song of Songs and Coheleth. Reprint ed., New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1970.

Glenn, Donald R. "Ecclesiastes." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 975-1007. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

Good, Edwin M. "The Unfilled Sea: Style and Meaning in Ecclesiastes 1:2-11." In Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, pp. 59-73. Edited by John G. Gammie, Walter A. Brueggemann, W. Lee Humphryes, and James M. Ward. New York: Union Theological Seminary, 1978.

Gordis, Robert. Koheleth--The Man and His World. Schocken Paperbacks on Jewish Life and Religion series. 1951; 3rd ed., New York: Schocken Books, 1968.

Gray, George Buchanan. The Forms of Hebrew Poetry. Library of Biblical Studies series. 1915; reprint ed. New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1972.

Haden, N. Karl. "Qoheleth and the Problem of Alienation." Christian Scholar's Review 17:1 (1987):52-66.

Hengstenberg, Ernest W. A Commentary on Ecclesiastes. 1869; reprint ed., Minneapolis: Klock and Klock Christian Publishing Co., 1977.

Holm-Nielsen, Svend. "The Book of Ecclesiastes and the Interpretation of It in Jewish and Christian Theology." Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute 10 (1976):38-96.

Hubbard, David A. Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon. Communicator's Commentary series. Dallas: Word Books, 1991.

Jennings, F. C. Old Groans and New Songs: Being Mediations on Ecclesiastes. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, n.d.

Johnston, Robert K. "Confessions of a Workaholic': A Reappraisal of Qoheleth." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 38 (January-March 1976):14-28.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. Ecclesiastes: Total Life. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1979.

_____. "Integrating Wisdom Theology into Old Testament Theology: Ecclesiastes 3:10-15." In A Tribute to Gleason Archer, pp. 197-209. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. and Ronald F. Youngblood. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Kidner, Derek. The Message of Ecclesiastes: A Time to Mourn, and a Time to Dance. The Bible Speaks Today series. Leicester, Eng., and Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1976.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 4: Psalms--Song of Solomon, by Carl Bernhard Moll and Otto Zockler. Translated and edited by Charles A. Briggs, John Forsyth, James B. Hammond, J. Fred McCurdy, Charles A. Aiken, Tayler Lewis, William Wills, and W. Henry Green.

Laurin, Robert. "Ecclesiastes." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 585-94. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Leupold, H. C. Exposition of Ecclesiastes. Wartburg Press, 1952; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1966.

Lohfink, Norbert. "The present and eternity: time in Qoheleth." Theology Digest 34:3 (Fall 1987):236-40.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Ogden, Graham. Qoheleth. Sheffield, Eng.: JSOT Press, 1987.

Plumptre, E. H. Ecclesiastes. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges series. Cambridge, Eng.: University Press, 1888.

Reitman, James S. "The Structure and Unity of Ecclesiastes." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:615 (July-September 1997):297-319.

Robinson, Theodore H. The Poetry of the Old Testament. London: Duckworth, 1947.

Scott, R. B. Y. Proverbs--Ecclesiastes. Anchor Bible series. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday and Co., 1965.

Shank, H. Carl. "Qoheleth's World and Life View as Seen in His Recurring Phrases." Westminster Theological Journal 37 (1974):57-73.

Short, Robert L. A Time to Be Born--A Time to Die. New York: Harper and Row, 1973.

Torcszyner, Harry. "The Riddle in the Bible." Hebrew Union College Annual 1 (1924):125-49.

von Rad, Gerhard. Wisdom in Israel. New York: Abingdon, 1972.

White, Graham. "Luther on Ecclesiastes and the limits of human ability." Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie 29:2 (1987):180-94.

Whybray, R. N. "Ecclesiastes 1.5-7 and the Wonders of Nature." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 41(June 1988):105-12.

_____. "Qoheleth the Immoralist? (Qoh 7:16-17). In Israelite Wisdom: Theological and Literary Essays in Honor of Samuel Terrien, pp. 191-204. Edited by John G. Gammie, Walter A. Brueggemann, W. Lee Humphreys, and James M. Ward. New York: Union Theological Seminary, 1978.

Wright, Addison G. "The Riddle of the Sphinx: The Structure of the Book of Qoheleth." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 30 (1968):313-34.

Wright, J. Stafford. "Ecclesiastes." In Psalms-Song of Songs. Vol. 5 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991.

_____. "The Interpretation of Ecclesiastes." In Classical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 133-50. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Yoder, Sanford Calvin. Poetry of the Old Testament. Scottdale, Pa: Herald Press, 1973.

Young, Edward J. An Introduction to the Old Testament. 1949; revised ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1960.

Youngblood, Ronald F. "Qoheleth's Dark House' [Eccles. 12:5]." In A Tribute to Gleason Archer: Essays on the Old Testament, pp. 211-27. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. and Ronald F. Youngblood. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, 1975 ed. S.v. "Ecclesiastes," by Gleason L. Archer Jr.

Zuck, Roy B. "God and Man in Ecclesiastes." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:589 (January-March 1991):46-56.

_____. "A Theology of the Wisdom Books and the Song of Songs." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 207-55. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Ecclesiastes (Book Introduction)

ECCLESIASTES.

INTRODUCTION.

This Book is called Ecclesiastes, or the preacher, (in Hebrew, Coheleth ) because in it Solomon, as an excellent preacher, setteth forth the vanity of the things of this world, to withdraw the hearts and affections of men from such empty toys. (Challoner) --- Coheleth is a feminine noun, to indicate the elegance of the discourse. It is very difficult to discriminate the objections of free-thinkers from the real sentiments of the author. It is most generally supposed that Solomon wrote this after his repentance; but this is very uncertain. St. Jerome (in chap. xii. 12.) informs us that the collectors of the sacred books had some scruple about admitting this; and Luther speaks of it with great disrespect: (Coll. conviv.) but the Church has always maintained its authority. See Conc. v. Act. 4. Philast. 132. (Calmet) --- It refutes the false notions of worldlings, concerning felicity; and shews that it consists in the service of God and fruition. (Worthington)

Gill: Ecclesiastes (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO ECCLESIASTES

This book has been universally received into the canon of the Scriptures, by Jews and Christians. The former, indeed, had once some controversy ^a about it; and they thought to have hid it, or put it among the apocryphal books; because, at first sight, some things seemed contradictory to each other ^b, and to incline to heresy ^c, atheism, and epicurism, and to assert the eternity of the world ^d: but they better considered of it; and when they observed those passages were capable of a good sense, and that the whole agreed with the law of God, they changed their minds ^e. And so likewise it has been rejected by some heretical persons, of the Christian name, as Theodore and Mopsuest, and others; and by deists, and some deistically inclined. But it carries in it such internal evidences of a divine original, as cannot well be denied; it delivers out and inculcates such divine instructions, concerning the duties of men to God, and one another; concerning the contempt of the world, and the carnal pleasures of it; the fear and worship of God, and a future judgment; as none but the wisdom of God could suggest. There are various things in it which seem to be referred to by Christ and his apostles; at least there is an entire agreement between them: among the many things that might be observed, compare Ecc 11:5 with Joh 3:8; and Ecc 11:9 with 2Co 5:10; and Ecc 7:20 with 1Jo 1:8. As to the author of it, there are evident marks of its being written by Solomon; yet, by some Jewish writers, it is ascribed to Isaiah ^f, which seems exceeding strange; for though he was a great prophet, and an evangelical preacher, yet no king in Jerusalem; whatever may be said for his being of the house of David, and of the royal family, as some have thought: and, besides, there is no agreement in style between this book and the writings of Isaiah. Others of them ascribe it to Hezekiah and his men ^g: Hezekiah was indeed the son of David, and David in expressly called his father; and he was a prince of great character, both with respect to religion, and to wealth and grandeur; see 2Ch 29:2; which might induce them to such a conceit; though it seems to take its rise from Hezekiah's men being the copiers of some of Solomon's proverbs, Pro 25:1; but the proof from thence must be exceeding weak; that because they were the transcribers of some of his proverbs, therefore were the writers of this book; and especially King Hezekiah; for, whatever may be said of his character, it falls greatly short of Solomon's wisdom or riches; and such things are said, with for respect to both, in this book, as cannot agree with him: and, on the other hand, it does not appear that he was addicted to wine and women, and gave himself a loose to carnal pleasures, as the writer of this book had formerly done. Grotius thinks it was written by some persons in the times of Zerubbabel, and published under the name of Solomon, as a penitent; which is quite shocking, that an inspired writing should have a false title put to it, and be imposed upon the church of God under a wrong name: besides, the name of Solomon is never mentioned in it; though this, by the way, betrays a conviction that he is intended in the title of it: nor are many persons concerned in it; it appears throughout the whole to be the work of a single person, who often speaks as such in it. That Zerubbabel should be meant by the one shepherd, Ecc 12:11, is a mere fancy; it is better interpreted, as by many, of Jesus Christ: his chief argument for this conjecture is, because there are three or four Chaldee words in it, as he supposes; which yet does not appear, and are nowhere to be found but in Daniel, Ezra, and the Chaldee interpreter: and so there are in the book of Proverbs, Pro 31:2; but it does not follow, that because these words, or others, are but once used in Scripture, that they are not originally Hebrew; since the language was more extensive and better understood in Solomon's time than now, when we have only the copy of the Old Testament in which it is preserved. In short, what is said of the descent and dignity of the writer of this book, of his wisdom, wealth, riches, and grandeur, of his virtues and of his vices, agrees with none as with Solomon; to which may be added, that there is one passage in it, the same he used in his prayer at the dedication of the temple, Ecc 7:20; compared with 1Ki 8:46. As to the time in which it was written by him, it seems to have been in his old age, as the Jewish writers observe ^h; after his sin and fall, and recovery out of it, and when he was brought to true repentance for it: it was after he had made him great works, and built houses, his own house and the house of God, which were twenty years in building; it was after he had acquired not only vast riches and treasures, which must require time, but had gotten knowledge of all things in nature; and had seen all the works that are done under the sun, and had made trial of all pleasures that were to be enjoyed; see Ecc 1:1; it was after he had been ensnared by women, which he confesses and laments, Ecc 7:26; and his description of old age seems to be made, not merely upon the theory of it, but from a feeling experience of the evils and infirmities of it, Ecc 12:1. The general scope and design of it is to expose the vanity of all worldly enjoyments; to show that a man's happiness does not lie in natural wisdom and knowledge; nor in worldly wealth; nor in civil honour, power, and authority; nor in the mere externals of religion; but in the fear of God, and the worship of him. It encourages men to a free use of the good things of life in a moderate way, with thankfulness to God; to submit with cheerfulness to adverse dispensations of Providence; to fear God and honour the king; to be dutiful to civil magistrates, and kind to the poor; to expect a future state, and an awful judgment; with many other useful things.

Gill: Ecclesiastes 5 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO ECCLESIASTES 5

This chapter contains some rules and directions concerning the worship of God; how persons should behave when they go into the house of God; concerning hearing the word, to which there should be a readiness, and which should be preferred to the sacrifices of fools, Ecc 5:1. Concerning prayer to God; which should not be uttered rashly and hastily, and should be expressed in few words; which is urged from the consideration of the majesty of God, and vileness of men; and the folly of much speaking is exposed by the simile of a dream, Ecc 5:2. Concerning vows, which should not be rashly made; when made, should be kept; nor should excuses be afterwards framed for not performing them, since this might bring the anger of God upon men, to the destruction of the works of their hands, Ecc 5:4; and, as an antidote against those vanities, which appear in the prayers and vows of some, and dreams of others, the fear of God is proposed, Ecc 5:7; and, against any surprise at the oppression of the poor, the majesty, power, and providence of God, and his special regard to his people, are observed, Ecc 5:8. And then the wise man enters into a discourse concerning riches; and observes, that the fruits of the earth, and the culture of it, are necessary to all men, and even to the king, Ecc 5:9; but dissuades from covetousness, or an over love of riches; because they are unsatisfying, are attended with much trouble, often injurious to the owners of them; at length perish, and their possessors; who, at death, are stripped quite naked of all, after they have spent their days in darkness and distress, Ecc 5:10; and concludes, therefore, that it is best for a man to enjoy, in a free manner, the good things of this life he is possessed of, and consider them as the gifts of God, and be thankful for them; by which means he will pass through the world more comfortably, and escape the troubles that attend others, Ecc 5:18.