Ecclesiastes: God Wants You to be Happy
You cannot understand this book without reading it. Duh, right? Yes. But people appear to avoid truly studying this book because they do not know how to read it.
First of all, what does “ecclesiastes” mean? It’s not the Greek word for “church.” Instead, it’s Latin for “preacher.”
From L to R: Joel Osteen, Bishop T.D. Jakes, Steven Furtick, and Carl Lentz.
Think of Ecclesiastes as an extremely well-known preacher who is delivering a sermon. They will speak for some time in an effort to communicate their point, often using stories or examples to drive home precisely what they’re saying. And, at times, they’ll do it multiple times in a sermon. That’s precisely what the preacher in Ecclesiastes does. In fact, it’s what many artists do. In Bailey Zimmerman’s song “You Don’t Want That Smoke,” he opens singing about a woman who is a certain kind of way, making his way to the point that you do not, in fact, want that smoke. It’s a way to say that she comes with all kinds of crazy stuff. But, in the end, he cleverly says, “You can judge me all you want, but you can’t say that you don’t want that smoke.” Using a play on words, Bailey in the end says that she is, in fact, desirable despite all the craziness she comes with.
The Preacher uses word play. The Preacher speaks on various topics. The Preacher formulates his literary masterpiece in eleven distinct sections. And, unless you’re able to recognize the divisions, you will end up missing out on the endings that come with each section. This is vital to understand because each section ender comes back to the same exact point the Preacher is making throughout the entire piece. If the theme is redundant, then the Author—the Holy Spirit—is wanting us to take this singular point home.
But what have we heard about Ecclesiastes? What does pop-culture tell us? Ecclesiastes is all about “vanity.”
L: The OG Narcissist; R: Miss P. and Animal taking a selfie. I suspect Miss Piggy initiated the picture, considering Animal’s a famous drummer.
Pop-Christianity tells us that this book is one big lesson on how all we do is nothing but that which is motivated by vanity. Pop-Christianity tells us that this piece shows the sinful nature of man; it shows how fallen we are because what truly motivates us is our inward selfishness. These individuals tell us that it is a lesson on why Jesus needed to die (i.e., because we’re all corrupt to our core). But exactly where does the text state this? Nowhere.
If we were to take this view, we would end up perverting what God has said was good—what God has given to us.
Think about it…
Again, this view seeks to take toil, remembering past works, wisdom, and building and expanding as something that is done because of one’s vanity. That is to say that what they want us to believe is that we work, build, and expand on this earth because we are puffed up. We seek to remember past works because we are puffed up. We want more wisdom because we are puffed up. But that is simply not what the text says. These erroneous conclusions are utterly divorced from the context of the very thing they are [not] reading.
Think about it…(x2)
If we’d slow down and consider the canonical witness (e.g., that which the entire Bible says about the subject), we’d see that the aforementioned view of “vanity” being the root-cause of toil (etc) is a perversion of the Scripture’s perspective. That is to say that, in Gen 1:28, we have Yahweh himself commanding us to expand and exercise our dominion over this earth. In Gen 2:15, God assigns man to work in the garden pre-Fall; work is not a result of the curse. Proverbs constantly speaks of gaining wisdom as a good thing that we must do above literally everything else. Finally, Hebrews 11 asks us to remember those who have come before us, that we might be encouraged by them and hold fast to faith (as opposed to, contextually speaking, doubt/unbelief). Is “vanity” therefore truly the motivation behind gaining wisdom when the Spirit expressly tells us to “get wisdom” and “insight” (Prov 4:5, 7)? Absolutely not. Gaining wisdom is not vain, it is obedience to Yahweh the Most High God.
We need to learn to think deeply. We need to actually study the text.
Now, I understand that people are going off of the English translation when they use “vanity” and misinterpret it. However, it seems to me that a diligent student of the Bible will be able to pick up the repeated themes of the Preacher so long as they actually read it. The week leading up to teaching this in class tonight, I’d asked my class to read this book, at a minimum, one time before the class started. However, I had said that they will better (and more easily) understand it if they read the whole thing four times. After all, it only takes 30 min. per session and, surely, everyone could give God 30 min. a day. Can’t you? With everything else we do, giving God 30 min. to study the text is literally and actually easy—especially in this digital, affluent age where (it seems) a massive amount of us do not have to work three jobs just to pay the bills, only to come home and pass out in the clothes we worked all day in. It seems to me that most of us do not work in the fields and woods all day as hunter-gatherers, from sun up to sun down, only to eat and sleep immediately. And this speaks to my point: a diligent student of the Bible—one who actually cares to give God time to hear from Him—will be able to read and comprehend the text so long as they simply put time to doing something as simple as reading.
This was necessary to say because I’m asking you here to read and think as well! Think about the word “vanity” and how inappropriate it is to say that our obedience to God is born out of vanity. Please do not give me the whole “oh, we all know those people who do that.” I’m asking you to focus on the text. In order to do that, we must pull the log out of our eyes, right?
“Vapor” is the appropriate word, in 2025.
I’ve created this fake ad as an attention getter because it’s a play on “vanity” that we are (hopefully) leaving behind. You see, what the text is actually saying is that all things are but a “vapor.” Put another way, all of our efforts will disappear just as a vapor disappears. It’s all temporary. Our lives, our work, our wealth, our pain. Thus, “hebel,” the Hebrew word, is better translated (in 2025) as “vapor.”
The LXX referenced above is an abbreviation for the Septuagint—the Greek translation of the Old Testament.
Why is the Septuagint important for us to bring in here? Because it’s closer to the source than any scholars I might choose to cite. I have plenty. From the doctors of the Church to post-modern conservative, Catholic scholarship, I could quote and cite source after source in an effort to back up my point. But citing the LXX enables us to see how the ancient Jews understood “hebel.”
You don’t need to read Greek to see that this image and the one above contain the same word. This here is the definition.
The LXX translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek before Christ. This Greek word, mataios, therefore helps us see that the ancient Jews understood “hebel” to mean "to no purpose.” Therefore, the use of “vanity” in our current translations are simply old English ways of saying, “I have done all of this to no avail. I have done all this work in vain. I have done all of this, only for it to result in its disappearance.”
No longer are you ill-equipped to read Ecclesiastes—at least in this regard. “Vapor” is more appropriate. That is, unless you can remember that “vanity” is simply a way to state that the Preacher has done and accomplished so much, only to realize that it will all one day disappear. It is precisely because of this that, through the Holy Spirit, the Preacher has been inspired to deliver to us, God’s people, a message from the Divine Being. And to this point, we shall get technical. Remember how I asked you to think critically earlier? Now is the time where, because of your love of God, it is time to study the flow of the text. Let us think deeply, setting aside all cares of the world so that we might hear exactly and precisely what God is saying to us. Why? Because we have made Ecclesiastes about us! We have made the text all about us rather than about what God has to say. We have become so vain that we’ve turned Ecclesiastes into a text that was written about our own vanity! The irony…
Here we have Dr. MLK Jr. preaching his last sermon in a cathedral in D.C. Let us thoughtfully consider what the Preacher has to say by studiously analyzing the text.
Consider the following outline of the text. Please read slowly and carefully. In order for this to make sense, you are going to need to read the entire book of Ecclesiastes so that you can see the apparent hard stops in the text. Each concluding response below ends a specific section wherein the Preacher speaks about specific subjects within a segment. Remember, this is a literary masterpiece that has been inspired by God. Yes, God uses creativity to teach us lessons just as he used creativity to…create…all that we see in the world.
Ecclesiastes: Enjoyment, Abundance, Prosperity as God’s Gift
Textual Analysis and Observations:
1. Reflection on work and wisdom (1:1-2:23)
· Concluding response: 2:24-26 - "There is nothing better for a person than that he should eat and drink and find enjoyment in his toil. This also, I saw, is from the hand of God"
2. Reflection on seasons and mortality (3:1-15)
· Concluding response: 3:12-13 - "I perceived that there is nothing better for them than to be joyful and to do good as long as they live; also that everyone should eat and drink and take pleasure in all his toil—this is God's gift to man"
3. Reflection on justice and death (3:16-22)
· Concluding response: 3:22 - "So I saw that there is nothing better than that a man should rejoice in his work, for that is his lot"
4. Reflection on oppression, work, and companionship (4:1-5:7)
· Concluding response: 5:18-20 - "Behold, what I have seen to be good and fitting is to eat and drink and find enjoyment in all the toil... this is his lot... For he will not much remember the days of his life because God keeps him occupied with joy in his heart"
5. Reflection on wealth and its limitations (5:8-6:12)
· Concluding response: 6:1-2 acknowledges God's gifts, though in this case highlighting when one cannot enjoy them
6. Reflection on wisdom and folly (7:1-8:14)
· Concluding response: 8:15 - "And I commend joy, for man has nothing better under the sun than to eat and drink and be joyful, for this will go with him in his toil through the days of his life"
7. Reflection on death and uncertainty (9:1-6)
· Concluding response: 9:7-10 - "Go, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart, for God has already approved what you do"
8. Final reflections on wisdom and life's uncertainties (11:1-10)
· Concluding response: 11:9-10 - "Rejoice, O young man, in your youth... but know that for all these things God will bring you into judgment"
The macro-view of the Preacher’s sayings consists of a pattern. This pattern reflects on the vaporous nature of something, then concludes that the proper response is to enjoy what God has given. A teaching point: life's fleeting nature isn't meant to lead to despair, but rather to a proper appreciation of God's gifts in the present moment.
The Preacher’s point can be summarized in the following manner: "Because everything is vapor and beyond our control, the wise response is to gratefully accept and enjoy what God provides while we can."
I’d include a picture of St. Paul here too, but my camera had run out of film the day we met.
Why did I include these preachers earlier? Was it for shock value? Slightly, but not entirely. These guys here are oft accused of perpetuating the “prosperity gospel.” People would put The Reverend Dr. MLK Jr. and The Reverend Dr. Billy Graham in entirely different categories than Osteen, Jakes, Furtick, and Lentz. And, to some degree, so would I. Yet in many ways I would say the latter are much more like St. Paul than the former. Am I crazy? No. I’m unbiased (here, at least) when it comes to the text.
We are so conditioned, for whatever reason, to resisting the fact that God wants to prosper us. We have pledged allegiance to the Poverty Gospel so vehemently that we ignore the fact that we here in America are the 1%. Literally. We live in big houses, drive cars we buy ON CREDIT, and throw away our food either because we were too full or because we let it go bad. We can sit around and watch TV because we live in such opulence and we make so much money. Put simply, we are not hard pressed enough for cash that we have to go out and work three jobs, only to pass out in our sweaty clothes (as I stated earlier). I could go on about this, but you already know the truth about your own life. And you can take one look at me and discern the same exact thing. The Poverty Gospel that pop-Christianity preaches is so anti-Scriptural that it seeks to deny, overlook, or straight up ignore the Spirit’s words in Psalm 35:7, “Yahweh delights in prospering his servants.” The next several classes on Ecclesiastes here at St. Mary’s will continue to address our wealth, God’s desire to prosper us, and our post-modern rejection of these Biblical truths. We will also address the interpretation of the Church Fathers and how they too insisted that, in the Bible, God desires to bless so that we might be a blessing to those around us (remember Genesis 12…?). The conclusion to the class will tie all of these things in with the Anglo-Catholic perspective on the same issue. That is to say that I will cite evidence from Anglo Catholic scholars who say the same thing as the Church Fathers, who say the same thing as what the Bible says. I cannot treat these categories fully here in this post. Still, I simply must teach the Scriptures.
Go back to the outline of Ecclesiastes earlier. See the Spirit’s conclusion at every single segment. The Spirit expressly tells us that, due to the vain (vaporous) nature of life, God’s gift to us is to enjoy the wealth He has given us, enjoy our toil and to be happy (Eccl 2:24-26; 3:12-13, 22; 5:18-20; 6:1-2; 8:15). This is the repeated pattern. And it is only discerned when one studies the text and sees the flow of the text with its hard stops at the end of every segment. St. Paul knew this very fact. And that’s why he used his Bible (which consisted only of Genesis-Malachi) to announce the gospel.
Allow me to quote Acts 14:15-17:
“Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men, of like nature with you, and we bring you good news,” (this is the word “gospel” in Greek) “that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them. In past generations he allowed all the nations to walk in their own ways. Yet he did not leave himself without witness, for he did good by giving you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying your hearts with food and gladness.”
Did you hear it? Did you read it thoroughly? Did you see Paul’s gospel proclamation influenced entirely by and taken explicitly from Ecclesiastes?
WUT? PaUl tHe PrOsPeRiTy GoSpEl PrEaChEr??? Nooooooooo
Let’s be unbiased here. Paul’s “good news,” his “gospel” does not contain pop-Christianity’s message of sin, the cross, salvation, death, resurrection, sin, anger, hell, sin………
A critical look at Paul’s message (here in Acts 14) is one that is straight out of Ecclesiastes. Paul unashamedly declares that his God is the one who, while they did whatever they wanted to do, was blessing them, prospering them financially (come on…it’s an agrarian society and Paul says his God was the one giving them the rains and fruitful seasons). He says that his God was the one who was “satisfying” their “hearts with food and gladness.” If you read Ecclesiastes, then you saw that that was directly taken from the book. Paul knows that his God is a good, generous, kind, merciful, loving, forgiving God (Ex 34). And his message is not post-modernity’s pop-Christian, uninformed, unstudious message. Is Paul’s message in Acts 14 the only way to declare the good news? Possibly not. But, when considering the fact that Paul was an apostle, taught by Jesus, sent by the Spirit in Acts 13, and inspired by the Spirit when preaching, it is not a way we are to ignore.
Dr. MLK Jr. did not preach a message of condemnation for soceity’s sins. He counterintuitively lived a message of love and peace.
Peter being angry at Jesus washing his feet.
We could be like Peter and desire the Poverty Gospel. But, like Peter, we’d be saying, “No, Lord!” But if Jesus wants to wash your feet, or if God wants you to be happy, who are you, the pot, to tell the Potter “no”? You’re nobody, according to Spirit’s words in Romans 9:20, “But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?” Yahweh delights in prospering his servants. His gift to us, as a loving, kind, generous Father, is our food, our work, our drink, our happiness—at least, according to the Preacher. Do you know better than God?
