Stealing Ecclesiastes Back!

In the opening track, “Helter Skelter,” of U2’s 1988 Rattle & Hum, Bono shouts, “This is a song Charles Manson stole from the Beatles and we’re stealing it back!” In the same way, Ecclesiastes is a book that the New International Version’s (NIV) translation of “vanity” as “meaningless” has stolen from many, and I want to steal it back!

Rather than being an advertisement for depression with a few “eat, drink, and be merry”‘s thrown in, Ecclesiastes is a gift from a loving God about how and where to find meaning and enjoyment on planet earth.

Let me explain.

The interpretive key to the book is the Hebrew word hebel, best translated “vanity” or “vain.” Here is an example from the English Standard Version (ESV):

“Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity.” (Eccl. 1:2)

The footnote in the ESV states that “the Hebrew term hebel, [again] translated vanity or vain, refers concretely to a ‘mist,’ ‘vapor,’ or ‘mere breath,’ and metaphorically to something that is fleeting or elusive (with different nuances depending on the context). It appears five times in this verse [the verse above] and in 29 other verses in Ecclesiastes.”[1]

The NIV, which is usually a great translation, here carelessly renders hebel as “meaningless”:

“Meaningless! Meaningless!” says the Teacher. “Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless” (Eccl. 1:2).

Wise translators exercise caution when it comes to words with a wide range of meanings that are notoriously difficult to translate. Here’s an example from the New Testament (NT): The word translated “baptize” has a range of meanings that include dip, immerse, pour, and sprinkle. This is one of the reasons why particular denominations differ on specific modes of baptism.  Methodists and Anglicans might highlight “sprinkling,” Mennonites “pouring,” and Baptist’s “immersion.” Nobody seems to like “dip” unless it’s the Presbyterians making sure any would-be Baptists know that “dipping is not necessary.” 🙂 But I digress—back to the main point: in using the broader term “baptize,” translators wisely avoid over-translation and protect the full sense of the word.

But the NIV—by replacing “vanity” with “meaningless”—doesn’t just over-translate and leave the fuller meaning of hebel unprotected, it picks the wrong word! Again, above we noted that ‘the Hebrew term hebel, translated vanity or vain, refers concretely toa ‘mist,’ ‘vapor,’ or ‘mere breath,’ and metaphorically to something that is fleeting or elusive.”[2] How the heck do you get “meaningless” from “vapor” or “mere breath?!” Obscure, foggy, shadowy, inscrutable, difficult to grasp, temporary—any of these words would have been better choices than meaningless.

Released as a NT in 1973 and as a complete Bible in 1978, the NIV has been one of the most popular translations. Unfortunately, given its influence, the decision to translate hebel as “meaningless” is a big reason, I believe, why many stay away from the book. Who wants to read a book about the meaninglessness of life—especially if we are depressed already?

Like an aggressive yellow-jacket at a fall picnic, translating hebel as “meaningless” becomes a serious deterrent to an otherwise enjoyable experience. So why did the NIV translation team make the decision it did?

I offer two likely reasons:

  1. They were influenced by what British scholar Iain Provan calls “the quotation theory” and made a poor interpretive decision—one influenced by their times (see #2 below). The quotation theory states that “the Preacher” of Ecclesiastes quotes from people he does not agree with so that he can refute them with “traditional wisdom.” The problem with this view is it’s too subjective: who decides which is which? In the end, the quotation theory becomes an attempt to tame the book. Provan suggests that a better approach is to take the book as it is and see the author of Ecclesiastes as “responding to a messy universe. That is why, in the end, his book is somewhat messy, nonlinear, and nonsystematic. Its form mirrors its content… It is difficult to see how any author of intelligence and integrity could approach a complicated universe in a markedly different way.”[3]
  2. We are all influenced by the times we live in and the translators of the NIV were no exception. “Meaningless” seemed an attractive choice against the backdrop of the existentialist mood of the 60’s. If you want to get a feel for how pervasive this mood was, or how it felt, watch the 1967 Oscar-winning film, The Graduate.

The “what were they thinking?!” question aside, why does all this matter? Because Ecclesiastes is part of a genre called wisdom literature and, as stated above, the book is a gift from a loving Creator about how and where to find meaning and enjoyment on planet earth.  Consider this statement by J.I. Packer on the importance of Ecclesiastes:

“The Bible is overflowing with humanity, full of wisdom about the business of living. There is in fact a whole section called the Wisdom Literature: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Solomon, and Ecclesiastes in the OT, and James in the New.  What seems to me the wisest things ever said about the five Wisdom books of the Old testament is this: the Psalms teach you how to pray, Proverbs how to live, Job how to suffer, the Song of Solomon how to love, and Ecclesiastes how to enjoy.”[4]

Friends, learning how to enjoy is worth the pursuit! As Autumn begins, be assured that there is no sacred writing more suited to this season than Ecclesiastes.  Why? Because both the season and the book display rich colors in the midst of death and decay. Yes, studying Ecclesiastes can feel like trying to find treasure in a chest full of puzzles. The investment, however, is well worth it.

Life is like a mere breath, fragile, and fleeting, but it’s definitely not meaningless. It is a loving gift to you from the “one Shepherd” (12:11) of your soul who has “put eternity into man’s heart” and makes “every beautiful in its time” (3:11).

 

For those interested in further reading, here are two excellent commentaries:

 

[1] The Holy Bible, English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2001).

[2] Ibid.

[3] Iain Provan, The NIV Application Commentary: Ecclesiastes/Song of Songs (Grand Rapids,MI: Zondervan, 2001) 36.

[4] J.I Packer, Knowing and Doing the Will of God, 60.