The limitations of human effort

Text Ecclesiastes 1:12-2:11 Time 29/05/2005 Place Childs Hill Baptist Church

Let me begin by describing a conversation between two Christians and asking you a question. We will call them Sophie and Joy. Both feel they are not making much progress in their Christian lives.

Sophie feels she can overcome her problems by working harder, by listening to more sermons, reading more books, by being more orderly and organised. ‘I need to get to know the Bible better’.

Joy thinks she needs to be more spontaneous, more ‘spiritual’, more natural and organic. She thinks she should have longer quiet times and go to more prayer meetings. ‘I need more of a sense of God’s presence’. Who is right? Sophie or Joy? We’ll come back to this at the end.

We’ve started to look at the Book of Ecclesiastes. We were saying last week that it is best to see Ecclesiastes firstly, like Job, as a wisdom book that warns against taking the very positive wisdom of Proverbs in a superficial and simplistic way and failing to see how complex and difficult life can be. Here is life in the raw, life as it is. The writer is not looking at life without God in the strict sense but at life as it is even though there is a God – something much more demanding and profound. The book is firstly for the people of God, to help them in their daily toils and struggles. It is not only hard-nosed but uses words of encouragement, calls on us to fear God and frequently draws attention to the coming judgement.

Last week we considered the opening 11 verses and we considered two things

1. The introduction to the book and what it says We considered

• Who wrote the book. The Teacher or Assembler, Son of David, king of Jerusalem. Though some have their doubts we see o reason for doubting that the author is Solomon.
• His initial text 2 Subject to the fall! Subject to the fall! says the Teacher. Utterly Subject to the fall! Everything is Subject to the fall.
• His searching question. 3 What does man gain from all his labour at which he toils under the sun?

2. The monotony of life under the sun as brought out in 4-11.

• The dreary passing of generation to generation
• The unvarying cycles that characterise the natural world (the rising and setting of the sun, the wind cycle, the water cycle)
• The wearisome nature of human desire
• The endless repetition that characterises life under the sun
• The thoughtless lack of appreciation of generation to generation

This week we want to look at the section 1:12-2:11. Let me remind you again that the book can be divided into four sections. The first ends with 2:24-26. I mention this again as it is important to see where the writer is heading. He wants us to see that satisfaction is something God-given. It isn’t something we have the power to conjure up by ourselves. To get to this point we need to hear what he has to say in 1:4-23. We’ve looked at 1:4-11 and the painful fact of the monotony of life under the sun. This evening I want us to focus on 1:12-2:11 and the limitations of human effort.

These early verses of Ecclesiastes are like a whole series of introductions. In 12 it seems as though the writer is starting all over again. In a sense he is as having set out his first basic ideas he wants to show next how he demonstrated from experience that everything under the sun really is fallen and empty, that man gains nothing from all his labour at which he toils under the sun. He wants to shut off all escape routes. He did this by walking two contrasting routes

1. What we may call the way of wisdom (though by that we must emphasise that we don’t mean heavenly wisdom as such); rationality, a self-denying and knowledge based direction – the route of hard study and diligent exploration.

2. What we may call the path of pleasure or irrationality, a self-indulgent and feelings based thoroughfare.

1. Realise that the way of wisdom cannot unravel life’s enigma

So first of all let’s think about the way of wisdom and knowledge, of rationality. Solomon begins in 12 I, the Teacher, was king over Israel in Jerusalem. He was a man with power and with wealth then. He was in a position to do what he did. We can divide 13-18 into two parallel parts. Firstly he tells us what he did and then gives us conclusion that it was all a chasing after the wind adding a proverb to each part - 15 What is twisted cannot be straightened; what is lacking cannot be counted. 18 For with much wisdom comes much sorrow; the more knowledge, the more grief. So we can ask 2 simple questions.

1. What did he do?

Well, he says 13a I devoted myself to study and to explore by wisdom all that is done under heaven. 16, 17a I thought to myself, Look, I have grown and increased me; I have experienced much of wisdom and knowledge. Then I applied myself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly, …. So here is earnest and sincere study and exploration. He grew and increased in wisdom more than anyone who had ruled over Jerusalem before him (including Melchizedek and other great kings). Solomon indeed was the wisest man of his day. He experienced much of wisdom and knowledge. He delved deep - it was an in depth study. He investigated all that is done under heaven – there was great breadth too. He applied himself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly – he adds that to show that he rationally studied all the mad bad and irrational things too but in a rational way. He kept his eye on the alternatives. Part of wisdom too is to know that all work and no play make Jack a dull boy. So this was not a case of overdoing it – excess of study. There was a balance here.

2. What did he find?

He says a number of things. 13b, 14 What a heavy burden God has laid on men! I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are meaningless, a chasing after the wind. 17b but I learned that this, too, is a chasing after the wind. What a sorry task it is to live here on earth as a human being, he says. He uses the Hebrew word Adam to refer to men, perhaps to emphasise that this is a fallen world. Whatever it is including religion itself, to the extent that it is merely under the sun it is empty and useless. As believers we are not against science or against study; we are not anti-intellectual but we must realise that study and knowledge in themselves can’t bring satisfaction. They can’t in and of themselves bring us to an understanding of the universe in which we live. This is one reason why scientists today are so frustrated. They keep thinking they will find the secrets of the universe at the bottom of a test tube, as it were. That is impossible. You may as well try and catch the wind.

Why is that? 15 What is twisted cannot be straightened; what is lacking cannot be counted. This is a fallen world full of twisted and incomplete things – warps and gaps. May be there was a time when the mere study of these things would have yielded answers but the world is now fallen it is lacking in perfection and so it will never make complete sense on its own. It’s like getting a game or a jigsaw second hand with bits missing – you can get so far but you can never make the complete picture or play the game as intended.

Solomon is not saying – don’t bother trying. Rather the point is to understand that our studies will only take us so far. Without something else – something more than under the sun it will not make sense.

The proverb in verse 18 acts as a warning - For with much wisdom comes much sorrow; the more knowledge, the more grief. Haven’t many found that to be the case? Mere knowledge in and of itself may make you happy for a while but it is a happiness that cannot last.

2. Realise that the path of pleasure cannot satisfy a man’s soul

Now some people would be quite happy with what I have said. ‘Quite right’ they’d say ‘Book learning never did anyone any great good’. Life’s for living. Stuffing your head with facts is going to get you nowhere. What good as all that science done us anyway – with their bombs and their experiments what a mess they’ve made of it all! You need to enjoy life. We’re not here long and if we can learn to enjoy it while we’re here then that’s wisdom enough. Well, Solomon was fully aware of that point of view too. And so, he tells us he explored that route too – and pretty thoroughly it would seem.

1. What did he do? Probably 1a describes the overall plan with his conclusion in 1b, 2 and then in 2-10 we have some more detail and his conclusion in 11. So

1. In general he tried the pleasure test. 1a I thought in my heart, Come now, I will test you with pleasure to find out what is good. Solomon decided that he would live simply for pleasure and see if that did bring satisfaction. Solomon was a very wealthy king and there was no pleasure available in that day that he could not have – all the food and all the drink, all the entertainment – music and singing and dancing – all the visual arts – all the women and wealth he could possibly dream of. He was in a position to truly test hedonism.

2. He goes into some detail. He tried

• The gratification test. 3 I tried cheering myself with wine, and embracing folly - my mind still guiding me with wisdom. I wanted to see what was worthwhile for men to do under heaven during the few days of their lives. He tried the pleasures of wine. He tried various forms of madness and badness – he is not specific. Some things are best not to be detailed. He tried it all.
• The enterprise test. It wasn’t all low-brow stuff either. He launched out on vast building projects and similar schemes. 4-6 I undertook great projects: I built houses for myself and planted vineyards for myself). I made (for myself) gardens and parks and planted all kinds of fruit trees in them. I made (for myself) reservoirs to water groves of flourishing trees. We know from elsewhere that Solomon took 13 years to build his own palace and that he also built a separate house of Cedar of Lebanon for his Egyptian wife. We read how he built cities in Hazor, Megiddo, Gezer, Beth-Horon, Baalath and Tadmor in the desert, which must have been a particular challenge. South West of Jerusalem in the Valley of Artas are pools known as the Pools of Solomon. Three massive reservoirs were built there in ancient times – probably by Solomon. What amazing things he did.
• The possessions test. He goes do mention some of his possessions and similar assets. 7 I bought male and female slaves and had other slaves who were born in my house. We would not employ salves perhaps today. There would be labour saving machines and a whole retinue of servants – a valet or a butler, a chef, a gardener, a driver, all sorts of secretaries and maids and other workers. Solomon had them all. I also owned more herds and flocks than anyone in Jerusalem before me. Again the possessions may be different today but you get the idea. 8 I amassed silver and gold for myself, and the treasure of kings and provinces. All sorts of people from his vast empire paid tribute to him. Solomon was so wealthy that silver was thought to be of little worth we learn. Everything was done in gold. He goes on I acquired men and women singers, vast choirs to sing for him when he wished and a harem as well - the delights of the heart of man. Solomon, being a great king acted in the way of eastern kings of the time and indulged in all sorts of pleasures. He sums up (9) I became greater by far than anyone in Jerusalem before me. He adds In all this my wisdom stayed with me to stress that he did not make the mistake that so many do of becoming intoxicated with his pleasure. Just as on the way of wisdom he explored madness and folly so in his madness and folly he remained rational. We all know that over-indulgence can spoil even the best things. In a word he says (10) I denied myself nothing my eyes desired; I refused my heart no pleasure. Outward and inward pleasures he tried them all. And he enjoyed it too. He is very honest about this. Because he approached in the right way My heart took delight in all my work, and this was the reward for all my labour. It is not the business of a Christian to deny the enjoyability of drink or drugs or gambling or the arts or music or sexual excess, etc. Of course, these things have their downside but here Solomon tells us that by acting in a balanced way he was able to get maximum pleasure from these things. The problem is not that these things cannot be enjoyed.

2. What did he find? Well, he tells us right at the beginning of this section so that we are in no doubt. 1b But that also proved to be meaningless. In the end, however, it is pretty empty. It doesn’t bring satisfaction. Simply living for pleasure doesn’t make sense. 2 Laughter, I said, is foolish. The lowbrow variety is morally lacking. It leads nowhere. And what does pleasure accomplish? High brow pleasure is no better. When the fine wine is gone, the building project complete, the show finished, the goods amassed where does that leave you? What advance have you made? He says, no doubt in his old age now (11) Yet when I surveyed all that my hands had done and what I had toiled to achieve, everything was meaningless, a chasing after the wind; nothing was gained under the sun.

And isn’t that the experience again of so many? God has made this world in such a way that there are many innocent pleasures, many things to enjoy and provided we do so with prayer and according to the Word of god that is fine. The problem comes when we begin to find meaning in these things – the actor or musician who lives to perform; the culture vulture who lives for that alone.

Such an approach to life is never going to work in the end. It is bound to leave you empty and disappointed.

Yet generally speaking you will find that these are the two basic philosophies of life that we are usually presented with. It was like that in Paul’s day. Remember when he preached to the Areopagus in Athens, the audience was made up mostly of Stoics and Epicureans. Both arose in the 3^rd Century BC. Epicureans viewed the world in terms of chance. There is no purpose or design in anything so there can be no final or absolute good. The highest good was seen to be pleasure, defined as absence of pain. It is often described as a sort of Hedonism but it was much more calculating than that – self-denial is okay as long as there is some advantage to self. Stoicism began with a philosopher called Zeno. They held that the world is not governed by chance but by a progressive purpose. Therefore the greatest good is to be found in conforming to reason. Our personal feelings are irrelevant and can be harmful, diverting us from exercising reason to solve our problems. Stoics aspired to perfect self-control, not giving in to sentimental considerations. This unflinching self-controlled attitude has gives rise to the modern use of the term. It was a fatalistic philosophy that lead to a high morality. The same sorts of contrasts can be seen down through history.

When I was growing up my minister was always warning us against modernism. By modernism he meant beliefs that denied the Bible was God’s Word and put its trust in the scientific hypotheses and theories of the day. Modernism, I think I am right in saying was originally an architectural term and describes the sort of steel and glass and concrete skyscraper style that was so popular in the middle of the last century. The term came to be used for many ideologies that looked to science and to rationality as the answer to every problem and the way to think. We are talking about the sort of attitude parodied in Dickens’ Hard Times in the character of Mr Gradgrind. He was very much of the opinion that what his children needed was more facts, more facts. This approach basically says that if we study hard enough, if we gather enough knowledge then we will understand what life is all about.

Today modernism continues to be a threat but now it is just as much if not more so post-modernism that is the danger. Post-modernism is again an architectural term. Post-modern architecture is characterised by a quirky, unusual, eclectic approach. They can still do skyscrapers but not like modernist ones – you’ve seen perhaps the Lloyds Building with all the plumbing and electrics etc on the outside or the famous Gherkin down near Tower Bridge. This is the sort of attitude summed up by the hippy sort of character who is pretty laid back and is more interested in experience than in facts. He hasn’t got much time for modern science but is open to alternatives - alternative therapies, alternative models of understanding. Variety and diversity are held to be important. The odder and more eclectic it seems the more they like it. They like to think outside the box.

So, going back to where we began. Which is right? Sophie or Joy? Practically, we need a combination in the right order but our greatest need is to put our faith in Christ, seeing the poverty of our own understanding and the emptiness of merely moving from one experience to the next. We must look to the Lord.