Session 4 The Problem with Work
Notes
Transcript
Handout
Handout
Sermon Tone Analysis
A
D
F
J
S
Emotion
A
C
T
Language
O
C
E
A
E
Social
Background
Background
The need to work is not a consequence of sin; God gave Adam work to do before sin entered the picture. Work is best viewed as a gift from God. However, though work is good, we are not to be consumed by it. For as Solomon observed, even though we see our work as productive and beneficial, a time will come when our work will not be valued by some and remembered by even fewer.
Let’s start with
18 I hated all my toil in which I toil under the sun, seeing that I must leave it to the man who will come after me, 19 and who knows whether he will be wise or a fool? Yet he will be master of all for which I toiled and used my wisdom under the sun. This also is vanity. 20 So I turned about and gave my heart up to despair over all the toil of my labors under the sun, 21 because sometimes a person who has toiled with wisdom and knowledge and skill must leave everything to be enjoyed by someone who did not toil for it. This also is vanity and a great evil. 22 What has a man from all the toil and striving of heart with which he toils beneath the sun? 23 For all his days are full of sorrow, and his work is a vexation. Even in the night his heart does not rest. This also is vanity.
In this section, the author laments the fact that all of the fruits of his labor will be left to the enjoyment of someone who did not earn them and may not be worthy of them.
In this section, the author laments the fact that all of the fruits of his labor will be left to the enjoyment of someone who did not earn them and may not be worthy of them.
What does The Preacher say about inheritance here? What does the Bible say about inheritance? Look at ; ; ;
15 “If a man has two wives, the one loved and the other unloved, and both the loved and the unloved have borne him children, and if the firstborn son belongs to the unloved, 16 then on the day when he assigns his possessions as an inheritance to his sons, he may not treat the son of the loved as the firstborn in preference to the son of the unloved, who is the firstborn, 17 but he shall acknowledge the firstborn, the son of the unloved, by giving him a double portion of all that he has, for he is the firstfruits of his strength. The right of the firstborn is his.
8 And every daughter who possesses an inheritance in any tribe of the people of Israel shall be wife to one of the clan of the tribe of her father, so that every one of the people of Israel may possess the inheritance of his fathers. 9 So no inheritance shall be transferred from one tribe to another, for each of the tribes of the people of Israel shall hold on to its own inheritance.’ ”
5 “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.
18 For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise.
It is not the work itself that the author hates; he hates the fact that he must leave his profit to someone who did not work for it. The Bible views inheritance as a positive, wonderful thing. For without it, we would have no path to the Father.
It is not the work itself that the author hates; he hates the fact that he must leave his profit to someone who did not work for it.
How would you describe The Preacher’s disposition here in these verses?
18 The Lord knows the days of the blameless,
and their heritage will remain forever;
25 I have been young, and now am old,
yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken
or his children begging for bread.
15 But God will ransom my soul from the power of Sheol,
for he will receive me. Selah
19 when he says, “I have found rest,
and now I shall feast on my goods!”
he does not know how long it will be
until he leaves them to others and dies.
15 Will you not leave the fruit of your labors to another,
and what you acquired by toil to be divided by lot?
It was regarded in a positive fashion. Yet all acknowledged that “you cannot take it with you” (Ps 49), and a certain resignation softened this law of reality. Qoheleth, however, exploits the theme in bitter fashion.
2:19 Not only must his wealth be left to someone who did not earn it, but it might be left to a fool.
19 Two reasons exacerbate the problem of inheritance: (1) the inheritor may be a fool; (2) the inheritor has made no personal investment in the acquisition of the inheritance. The first reason implies a value judgment in favor of wisdom, but even if the inheritor were wise, the second reason would count against such a person. The issue of succession reflects back on the thought expressed in v 12b concerning the conduct of royal successors. “This too is vanity” serves as a divider from vv 20–23, but the theme remains the same.
2:20 The author despairs because of the possibility that a fool will reap the rewards of all the work of a wise person.
He seems quite selfish; insensitive to the considerations of family. The biblical sense of values certainly had a greater appreciation of common good, but he is quite individualistic in this matter.
2:21 The Hebrew word used here, ra'ah, is paired with the Hebrew word hevel (which can be rendered as “meaningless” or “vanity”; see note on 1:2) several times in Ecclesiastes (4:8; 6:2). It emphasizes the unfairness or injustice of the situations the author describes.
Ra’ah
Kind of ironic here considering there would not be a single ruler of Israel from this point forward.
While the word ra'ah is often translated as “evil,” it can also indicate misfortune, disaster, harm, or trouble. Job responds to his wife by saying they should accept the “evil” or “disaster” that God brings along with the good things (see Job 2:10 and note). Proverbs and Psalms both warn against planning “evil” or “harm” against a neighbor (e.g., Prov 3:29; Psa 15:3). Here, the author uses ra'ah to show how troubling it is that a person must leave all the fruits of his labor to someone who did not earn it.
Compare the words of the Preacher here to the Abrahamic Covenant in and the Davidic Covenant in . What can you conclude?
1 Now the Lord said to Abram, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you. 2 And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. 3 I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”
21 He expands on the considerations that he advanced in vv 18–19, stressing the irrelevant role that toil and wisdom play in the matter of inheritance, and hence the basic injustice that takes place. E. Podechard aptly quotes the comment of Jerome: “one has the fruit of another’s labor, and the sweat of the dead is the ease of the one who lives” (alter labore alterius perfruatur et sudor mortui, deliciae sint viventis; see CChrSL, 72:271). Qoheleth never takes the optimistic attitude that at least the one to whom possessions are left is fortunate (perhaps because he thought that such an individual will not be able to take it with him, but must leave it to someone else?). The biblical sense of values certainly had a greater appreciation of common good, but he is quite individualistic in this matter (contrast 4:10ff.). He seems insensitive to the considerations of family.
11 When your days are fulfilled to walk with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, one of your own sons, and I will establish his kingdom. 12 He shall build a house for me, and I will establish his throne forever. 13 I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son. I will not take my steadfast love from him, as I took it from him who was before you, 14 but I will confirm him in my house and in my kingdom forever, and his throne shall be established forever.’ ”
While God promised salvation to all peoples through the power of inheritance, The Preacher could not see past his own efforts.
22 This rhetorical question underscores the verdict of vanity uttered in v 20 (and cf. 1:3). The “striving of the heart” (רעיון; cf. 1:17) connotes all the human effort and hope involved in toil. Frustration, rather than injustice, is the point.
2:23 There is great effort required even though the results are only temporary.
23 K. Galling and A. Lauha regard v 23a as a proverbial saying derived from merchant life (cf. 4:6; 5:11), but the observation is not to be limited to one area of life. Qoheleth continues to stress the restlessness and frustration that accompany toil.
This passage is built around the notion of עמל (˓āmāl), understood both as the fruit of one’s toil and as the toiling itself. As a noun or as a verb, it occurs no less than eleven times in this short section. The vanity of toil is manifold. In itself it merely brings on pain (v 23). The traditional view that the children of the just fared well (e.g., Ps 37:25) made no impression on Qoheleth. Even after the penalty of death one could not rely on one’s descendants! There was no way of ensuring inheritance; it could be used properly or squandered foolishly. As already indicated, this is a very narrow notion of family and inheritance that is taken by Qoheleth. One feels that he is straining his argument here. There is an unremitting note of “vanity” that fills the passage.
Let’s move to
9 What gain has the worker from his toil? 10 I have seen the business that God has given to the children of man to be busy with. 11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also, he has put eternity into man’s heart, yet so that he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end. 12 I perceived that there is nothing better for them than to be joyful and to do good as long as they live; 13 also that everyone should eat and drink and take pleasure in all his toil—this is God’s gift to man.
Ecclesiastes 3:9-13
3:9 The inability of people to achieve any real gain is a recurring theme throughout the book. See note on 1:3.
9 The rhetorical question (cf. 1:3) passes judgment on human activity as being without profit. One is locked into a world of events that one cannot shape. Such is the direction given to the litany of times in vv 1–8. The conclusion leaps ahead of the data and is to be explained by the reasoning in vv 10–15, where Qoheleth will also emphasize that humans do not know the right time. In v 9 he is applying the poem on time to human toil; no amount of effort can change the time that God has determined.
10 Qoheleth begins a reflection (ראיתי; cf. 3:16; 4:1, 4, 7; 6:11; 7:15; 8:10; 9:11, 13) that grows out of the poem on time. Already in 1:13 he has spoken of the harsh task (ענין) with which God has afflicted humans; there it referred to the attempt to make sense out of what is done in the world; here it is applied to the problem of determinate times.
3:11 The Hebrew word used here, yapheh, is often translated “beautiful,” but it can also be understood as “appropriate” or “good.”
God has placed in order all human activity—both positive and negative. The description of this order as “appropriate” or “good” recalls the description of creation in Gen 1 as “good” (e.g., Gen 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). The author later uses the same language found in God’s curse on Adam to refer to death (Eccles 3:20; Gen 3:19). While God’s work is “good,” the fall has rendered life frustrating and senseless (Eccles 1:2; 12:8).
People have a desire to understand how they fit into the plan of life—which the author attempts to explain in this book (1:13; 8:16–17).
In Ecclesiastes, this Hebrew word (olam) often occurs in passages that contrast it with the brevity of human life. In 1:4, generations come and go while the earth remains forever (olam). In 2:16 and 9:6, death prevents people from being remembered forever (olam). In 12:5, death is the eternal (olam) home of humanity. In v. 14, God’s work lasts forever (olam). Here it probably refers to a desire in people to understand the eternity of God’s work (v. 14).
While God has set the appropriate time for everything, He has not revealed this to humanity.
This verse illustrates the limitations of human knowledge, one of the key themes of Ecclesiastes (compare 7:23; 8:16–17). God has set a time for everything and has put eternity in the hearts of all people (see previous note). However, humanity cannot discern God’s timing.
11 Qoheleth says that God has put העלם, “duration,” into the human heart. Whether this action is seen as positive or negative (see the interpretation of מבלי in note 11.a.), the result is the same: humans have not been helped because they cannot understand what God is about. The interpretation of העלם has been a crux interpretum. LXX (ἀιῶνα) and Vg (mundum) understood it to mean “world.” This could be taken as a desire for knowledge of the world in a good sense, or as a kind of secularism or worldliness (1 John 2:16). However, עלם in the sense of world is not found in biblical Hebrew, and Qoheleth elsewhere (e.g., 3:14) uses the word in a temporal sense. A traditional view understands the word to mean “eternity” (so the rsv and many commentators such as W. Zimmerli and H. Hertzberg; but nrsv, “a sense of past and future”). F. Delitzsch understood it to be the desiderium aeternitatis, or “the desire of eternity.” F. Ellermeier (Qohelet I/1, 320) argued for Unaufhörlichkeit, “incessability.” N. Lohfink interprets the “eternity” of Eü; to mean “ever new repetition” (cf. 3:15), through which the events described in 1:4–11 are now rooted in God’s activity.
Here עלם has the meaning of duration (see E. Jenni, ZAW 65 [1953] 24–27), as opposed to עת, which means a definite period of time; this antithesis should be preserved in v 11. E. Podechard describes it well: “עלם means the whole, of which עת designates each part; it is the whole of duration or the totality of the particular times that were mentioned in the preceding vv 1–8.” Moreover, since according to v 14 God’s action is עלם לֶעלם seems to be a divine, not a human, category. But so also is עת in the sense that it stands for the specific times fixed by God (vv 1–8). The divine timing of human events is good (v 11, יפה, “beautiful”—perhaps a reminiscence of טוב, “good,” in Gen 1). Both of these aspects of time impinge upon human existence, but no one is able to comprehend their effects.
3:12 Faced with human limitations, people should enjoy life and be content with what they are given (7:13–14).
12–13 The opening “I know” lends emphasis and is balanced by the “I know” that begins a new thought in v 14. The verses are typical of the resigned conclusions found elsewhere, esp. 2:24 (see Comment there). Although this concession to pleasure as a “gift of God” for human toil seems grudging, it is evaluated positively by R. Johnston (CBQ 38 [1976] 14–28), who argues from the “intentionality” or underlying consciousness of Qoheleth. In this view positive value is given to joy in this life; it is the gift of God.
3:13 Enjoyment of life is a gift of God. See note on 9:7–10.
in the toil that marks these time limits there is no profit for a human being. These are all God’s times, and Qoheleth has no quarrel with them in themselves: they are all “appropriate” in the divine plan. But the divinity has played a desperate trick upon humanity, placing that mysterious הָעֹלָם, “duration,” “world,” in human hearts so that they can make no sense out of God’s work. That is a fantastic statement of divine sabotage.
There can be no pleasant connection between the gift of הָעֹלָם in the human heart and the other divine “gift”—eating and drinking. That meager pleasure—symbolic of the best that humans can enjoy—seems to be a compensation for the העלם. In what appears to be a play on the word, the divine activity is characterized as לעלם, “eternal.” This sets the stage for the proper response of humans to God: numinous, reverential fear (v 14).