PM Home Bible Study Group; September 23, 2009
Ecclesiastes 3:18-22

Theme: Without the hope of the justice of God beyond life “under the sun”, man neither dies nor lives better than the beasts of the earth.

This evening’s portion of Ecclesiastes must be understood in the light of the context of what is around it. Most immediately, Solomon has mentioned the hope he has for the ultimate judgment of God beyond life “under the sun” in order to make sense of the injustice he finds there. He sees such injustice (3:16); but knows that God will ultimately “judge the righteous and the wicked” (v. 17). What’s more, Solomon has affirmed that there is an ultimate judgment (11:9; 12:14); and that there is a human spirit that returns to the God who gave it (12:7). So; what Solomon says in this evening’s passage is not an expression of despair. Rather it’s a matter of forcing a world-view that excludes the judgment of God to its logical—and unacceptably absurd—conclusions regarding the nature of life itself. And this is something that Solomon does more than once in this book. In this “under the sun” view, the end of life leaves one without any sense of justice or purpose (9:2-3, 11-12).

In this passage, Solomon forces the strict ‘materialist’—the man who argues that what we see in this world is all that there is, and that there’s nothing beyond—to carry his world-view to it’s logical end. And in doing so, he underscores the great value there is in saying with his father King David;

Therefore my heart is glad and my glory rejoices;
My flesh also will dwell securely.
For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol;
Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay.
You will make known to me the path of life;
In Your presence is fullness of joy;
In Your right hand there are pleasures forever (Psalm 16:9-11).

* * * * * * * * * *

I. THE TEST GOD GIVES (v. 18).

A. Solomon begins this new section with the words, “I said in my heart . . .” This is similar to what he said in verse 17 (see also 1:16; 2:1, 15; 9:1). It expresses his reflection on a proposition. One of the great challenges we face in dealing with ungodly world-views is the habit people have of not taking them following them through all the way to the end. So often, the conclusions that such a practice would lead to are so horrifying and unacceptable that people refuse to do so. Solomon does not. He thinks things through to their end.

B. Solomon takes up the subject of the nature of life itself. He considers “the condition of the sons of men”. Though the word “condition” is not found in the original language, it is implied. And the nature of things, as Solomon has it, is that human beings are being “tested” by God. They are being forced, by the nature of the things they see, to come to a conclusion about themselves. The test is that if man concludes that all that is seen “under the sun” is truly all that there is, then he sees that mankind is like animals. “There inner thought is that their housese will last forever, their dwelling places to all generations; they call their lands after their own names. Nevertheless man, though in honor, does not remain; he is like the beasts that perish” (Psalm 49:11-12).

C. The fact that this is a “test” should always be kept in mind, though. What a grim passage this would be if we didn’t know that in advance! The fact that it is a test, however, helps us to appreciate that Solomon is forcing the reader, who rejects the thought of God or an afterlife, into the conclusion that such a view must lead to; and then allow them to feel the pain of it and see that it can’t be lived consistantly. We all live—no matter what we may say—as if we were not merely animals, as if there is more to life than what we see, and as if our lives on earth have purpose and meaning beyond ourselves. We crave meaning in a way that animals do not. No animal philosophizes over whether or not it is more than an animal! No animal asks questions about the meaning of existence, or expresses a longing for ultimate justice.

II. THE OBSERVABLE FACTS (vv. 19-20).

A. Solomon, again simply basing the matter on observable facts “under the sun”, considers “death” and argues that “what happens to the sons of men also happens to the animals; one thing befalls them: as one dies, so dies the other” (v. 19a). Man has no advantage over the animals. Both physically die. The bodies of both grow cold. The bodies of both undergo decomposition. The dust that one crumbles into is no different from the dust of the other.

B. Similarly, Solomon argues that there’s no difference between the principle of “life” if viewed strictly “under the sun”. “Surely,” he says, “they all have one breath”. Viewed strictly from a biological standpoint, “life” is the same in one as in the other; and “man has no advantage over animals, for all is vanity” (v. 19b). If the life of an animal is ultimately meaningless, then the life of a man is no better. Ingrid Newkirk of PETA would then have been absolutely right in saying, “A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.”

C. Finally, Solomon speaks to the matter of the ultimate destiny of both. “All go to one place: all are from the dust, and all return to dust” (v. 20). The Bible, of course, teaches that we are made from dust (Genesis 1:24) as are all other things (2:19). But man is unique in that he had the breath of God breathed into him (2:7). But in a strictly material sense, man also “returns” to the dust from which he was made (Genesis 3:19; Psalm 104:29; 145:4); and in this sense is no different from the animals.

III. THE GREAT ‘UNPROVABLE’ (v. 21).

A. From a strictly “observable” perspective, then, Solomon argues that there’s no way of knowing that man has anything over the animals. “Who knows,” he asks, “the spirit of the sons of men, which goes upward, and the spirit of the animal, which goes down to the earth?” Has anyone actually, scientifically recorded the departing of a spirit from a man to see where it goes? Who even knows, in this way, that man or animals even have such a thing as a spirit?

B. Again, it’s important to understand what Solomon is doing in saying this. He is not asking the question out of any sense of doubt in himself. 12:7 would be enough to make this clear! Rather, he’s forcing the reader to come to the conclusion he came to by viewing things strictly under the sun; and helping to show that the “eternity” that God has placed in our hearts (3:11) makes this conclusion unacceptable.

IV. THE CONCLUSION ‘UNDER THE SUN’ (v. 22).

A. Solomon follows this “under the sun” conclusion through and says, “So I perceived that nothing is better than that a man should rejoice in his own works . . .” A man may as well do as he pleases and be happy with it. If there is no God, if there is no afterlife, if there is no ultimate meaning, and if there is no ultimate judgment, why might men not do as they please? Animals don’t treat one another with justice or equity. Why should we, if we are no better than they? Sadly, many tyrants in history have put this very philosophy into practice—and if it were true, who could pass judgment on them?

B. “For who can bring him to see what will happen after him?” Solomon concludes that no one, based strictly on the observable facts of the physical world, no one would be able to tell anyone what comes after death—or even if there is anything after death. Again, Solomon doesn’t believe this (see 12:13-14). He is simply showing that it is the logical conclusion of a strictly materialistic view of life “under the sun”.

* * * * * * * * * *

In all this, Solomon underscores the great value there is in saying with his father King David; “Therefore my heart is glad and my glory rejoices; my flesh also will dwell securely.  For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; nor will you allow Your Holy One to undergo decay.  You will make known to me the path of life; in Your presence is fullness of joy; in Your right hand there are pleasures forever” (Psalm 16:9-11).