An Exposition of the Book of Ecclesiastes

^f^^ ^^^^ LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY OF 1 LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY OF T /v /v r^ (V (V fv TTTTTrjrTmi "7r?^nprrc7 LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ^^ zS^ '-^ F CALIFORNIA LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA % ryrTTTrTrjÊ 7r-î-K~j~nrj: C3 î î Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2008 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/expositionofbookOObridrich AN EXPOSITION OF THE BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES. BY THS REV. CHARLESÎiroGES, M.A., RECTOR OF IlINTON MARTELL, DORSET. AUIBOR OF AN " EXPOSITION OF I-SALM CXDC ;" " COiDIENTARY OX PROVERBS " CTBISnAN MDOSTRY ;" " MEMOffi OF 31ART JANE GRAHAM," ETC. LI P!OF THB UNIVERSITY, NEW YORK: ROBERT CARTER & BROTHERS, No. 580 BROADWAY. 1860. -^^ ^-"i-^d. EDWAED 0, JENKINS, Printer and Stereotyper, No. 26 Feankfobt Stebet. PREFACE. The Book of Ecclesiastes has exercised the Church of God in no common degree. Many learned men have not hesitated to number it among the most difficult Books in the Sacred Canon. ^ Luther doubts Avhether any Exposition up to his time has fully mas- tered it.' The Patristic Commentaries, from Jerome downwards, abound in the wildest fancies ; so that, as one of the old interpreters observes, ' the trifles of their allegories it loathetli and wearieth me to set down." Expositors of a different and later school have too often/' darkened counsel bywords without knowledge" (Job, xxxviii. 2) ; perplexing the reader's mind with doubtful theories, widely diverging from each other. The more difficult the book, the greater the need of Divine Teaching to open its contents. However val- uable be the stores of human learning, they will not * Merceri Ccmmmt. fol. 1651 (Hebrew Professor at Paris). See also Poll Synopsis, Prolegom.; Comment, by Rev. George Holden, 8vo. 1822, Prelim. Dissert, ii. - Quoted in Geier's Comment. 4to. Lips. 1668. ' Serranus on chap. iv. 12, also on iii. 15. 'A godly and learned commentary upon this excellent Book of Solomon, commonl}' called "Ecclesiastes." 12 mo. 1585. Translated out of Latin by John Stock wood (the translator of several of Calvin's Commentaries). A mass of the various Patristic interpretations may be seen in a Jesuit commentary Joaun': Lorini, 4to. 1606. (iii) — IV PREFACE. throw one ray of true light upon the word, without the heavenly influence of the Great Teacher. Separate from Him/' the light that is in us is darkness/' (Matt, vi. 23.) The Author confesses that he has felt his measure of difficulty as to some of the statements of this Book. But the result of his inquiry into its Divine credentials has been solidly satisfactory. The conclusion there- fore was natural, that a Book that ' had God for its Author,' must have ' truth, loitliout any mixture of er- ror, for its matter.'^ Some of its maxims have indeed been too hastily supposed to countenance Epicurean indulgence. Nay—even Voltaire and his Monarch disciple have dared to claim detached passages as fa- vouring their sceptical philosophy.— But ' all of them' —as Mr. Scott observes ' admit of a sound and use- ful interpretation, when accurately investigated, and when the general scope of the book is attended to.'^ —If any difficulties still remain, as Lord Bacon remarks ' If they teach us nothing else, they will at least teach us our own blindness.'— Thus Pascal profoundly remarks on the Scriptures ' There is enough bright- ness to illuminate the elect, and enough obscurity to humble them. " All things work together for good " to the elect ; even the obscurities of Scripture, which these honour and reverence on account of that Divine clearness and beauty, which they understand.'^ There is, however, a wide difference between what appears ' Locke. ''Preface to Ecclesiastes. Witsius confirms this judgment. MiscelL Sacra, vol. i. chap, xviii. § 36-39. See also Holden, Prelim Dissert, ii. iii ' Thoughts, xviii. • No learning is sufficient to make a proud man PREFACE. V upon the surface, and what a thoughtful mind in a prayerful spirit will open from the inner Scripture. It is most important to study the Bible in the spirit of the Bible—to exercise a critical habit in a spiritual atmosphere. Prayer, faith, humility, diligence, will bring rest and satisfaction to minds exercised—in the school of God. As an able preacher remarks ' We expect to find some difficulties in a revelation from a Being like God to such a creature as man. We even rejoice in these difficulties. They are the occasion of our growth in grace. They exercise our humility. They are like the leaves and flowers, of which the crown of faith is woven. They remind us of our own weakness and ignorance, and of Christ's power and wisdom. They send us to Him and to the Gospel.'^ Our last testimony on this anxious point we draw from the highest school of instruction— the death-bed. ' We must acknowledge'—said the late Adolph Monod — ' that in the beginning of the study of Scripture, there are many difficulties, and much obscurity. Some labour is necessary to dissipate them ; and the mind of man is naturally slow and idle ; and he easily loses courage, and is satisfied with reading over and over again, without penetrating further than the surface ; and he learns nothing new ; and the constant perusal of the same thing causeth weariness, as if the word of God was not interesting ; as if we could not find some new instruction in it ; as if it were not —inexhaustible as God Himself. Let us ever'—^he adds ' beware of understand the truth of God, unless he first learn to be humble.' —Bp. Taylor's Sermon before the Universily of Dublin. ^ Canon Wordsworth's Sn-mon on the Inspiration of the OM Testament. ^ VI PREFACE. thinking these difficulties insurmountable. "We must give ourselves trouble. For here, as in every part of the Christian life, God will have us to be labourers with Himself ; and the knowledge of the Bible, and a relish for the Bible, are the fruit and recompence of this humble, sincere, and persevering study.' But to come more closely to the difficulties connect- ed with this Book—Besides the objections brought against its principles, the peculiar construction of some of its maxims occasionally gives rise to—perplexity. Mr. Holden adverts to the mistake of ' taking in their utmost extent expressions designed to convey a qualified— and limited signification.' He wisely remarks ' General propositions are not always to be received in the strictest sense of the words. And particular observations must not be stretched beyond the intention of the writer. This results from the in- herent imperfection of language, that his expressions ought to be interpreted with such restrictions, as are necessarily required by common sense, and the scope of the context. If several expressions in the Ecclesiastes, which have been condemned, be understood in this qualified sense—a sense clearly suggested by truth and reason—they will be found in every respect worthy of the inspired Author, from whom they proceed.'* But with all its difficulties, we must admit the book to be fraught with practical interest. It teaches lessons peculiarly its own—lessons, which we are too yet, which we must thoroughly slow to learn ; and learn for our own personal profit and happiness. * Adolphus Moaod's Furemll Addresses : xv. Address. ' Prelim. Dissert. Ixxviii. Ixxix. — PREFACE. Vll They are essential, as preparatory to our enjoyment of the Gospel. The precise place of the Book in the Sacred Canon is somewhat remarkable. Its juxtaposi- tion with ' The Song' illustrates a fine and striking contrast between the insufficiency of the creature and the sufficiency of the Saviour. ' What a stimulus to seek after the true and full knowledge of Christ is the realized conviction of the utter vanity of all things else without Him.'^ To " drink and thirst again" is the disappointment of the world. To "drink and never thirst" is the portion of the Gospel." We must not however linger upon particular points. Some preliminaries yet remain to be noticed, ere we enter upon a detailed Exposition. A few words upon I. The Writer of this Book.—This we should have thought had been a matter placed beyond controversy. The ivords of tJie Son of David—King of Jerusalem— seem to point with absolute precision to Solomon—the only Son of David who was the possessor of that roy- alty. (Ch.i.1.12.)* But some critics of name*—from the difference of style—the use of a few words of sup- * See A Brief Exposition of Ecclesiastes, by Mr. John Cotton. Boston, New England, 12mo. 1654. » See John, iv. 13, 14. ' Iâmpe also (the commentator on St. John) remarks on the descrip- tion of his extraordinary' wisdom (v. 13), magnificence, and luxury (Chap, ii.), which could not attach to any other man than Solomon. He adverts also to the analogy of some of his sentiments as expressed in the Book of Proverbs, e. g. P]ccles. i. 8, with Prov. xxvii. 20, c( elia. Notes in Eccles. 4to. 1741. * Such as Grotius, Dathe, and others. Even Lampe doubts whether the ichole was written by Solomon. But his ground is weak and in- conclusive. — VIU PREFACE. posed later origin—the introduction of incidental mat- ters not—as they, think—falling within the ken of Solo- mon's vision—on these and other grounds they have determined the writer to belong to some later era. The arguments, however, in favour of this hypothesis, theoretical doubts or plausibilities amount only to ; while they involve a supposition utterly unworthy of Inspiration—namely—that some unknown writer has palmed upon the Church in the Sacred Canon his own thoughts and words under the deceptive cover of the name of the Son of David—King of Jerusalem.

Load more