For the living know that they shall die; but the dead know not anything, neither have they any more a reward, for the memory of them is forgotten.
Ecclesiastes 9:5 is quoted often in arguments about life after death, and misused just as often. Does it reveal the state of the dead, or does it only report what a living man sees from the graveside?
The verse does not stop at the words about the dead knowing nothing. It runs on into words that no one applies beyond this world.
You quote, for example, Ecclesiastes 9:5: "the dead know nothing": now how does this go on? "And they have no more reward." Do you believe that applies to anything beyond this world? You know well you do not; you teach the contrary. "For the memory of them is forgotten… and forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun." Is it not as clear as the sun that all this applies to this world? So does the whole book, which speaks of what is under the sun in the days of the life of our vanity.
Read within that boundary, each phrase describes the dead man's relation to the world he has left, not the condition of his soul.
He was looking at the scene around him, out of which men departed and left no sign behind to show that they had been. Their memory was forgotten… In relation to that scene they knew nothing; their wisdom and knowledge had departed too. This does not mean that they "lost their memories," or that they became fools. They knew nothing of things taking place after they left, and their wisdom or knowledge could not appear in the scene any more. The closing sentence shows clearly what the earlier part applies to: "and forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun."
One everyday example shows how far this ignorance reaches.
A man may have been the watchful head of a large business on earth. Once he leaves this world behind, he knows nothing more of it, or whether it prospers. And so with all departed ones as far as human affairs are concerned.
Commentators differ on how much weight the words themselves carry. Some ask whether verse 5 is God's teaching at all.
But is this the truth? Is this a doctrine of the faith delivered to the saints? Is this the revelation of God? A thousand times, No! It is the verdict which the natural man — pagan or unbelieving philosopher — pronounces.
Others weigh the words by what the writer could not yet know.
Death is the end of all here below; but in Him is life, and those who believe have it in Christ. Before He came, death could not but be dreadful: so dim, even to the believer, was the light beyond. Now we can call death gain, and very much better than the life of this world; for it is to depart and be with Christ.
Many use this verse to argue that the soul sleeps between death and resurrection. Commentators give two answers. The first weighs the word "sleep," and points to two men who were conscious after death.
Some tell us that men lie passive until the resurrection, and press the word "sleep" in support of their notion. But Scripture says "sleep" only of the body, never of the soul. Lazarus was "comforted." This was conscious blessedness… The rich man, too, was conscious. He was in pain. As he saw the joy of Lazarus, he felt his own loss. His memory was alive, and fear filled him for his five brothers still alive on the earth.
The second is that the same book closes the question itself.
That Solomon himself contradicts such an interpretation of Ecclesiastes 9:5 as soul-sleep is clear. He says, "and the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the spirit returns to God who gave it" (Ecclesiastes 12:7).
The living have one thing the dead do not: they know death is coming. Ecclesiastes draws a practical lesson from that.
Then the moral is: be busy now; work ceases in the grave; wisdom for this busy scene is not there; no heart that plans; no planning head. All true in its way. But this was man's musing, not divine revelation about the state of the dead at all. Had you asked this man what he knew of that, he would have said, as he did say, Who knows? "Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward?" He saw the dust laid in the tomb, and that was all he knew. The rest was guesswork, nothing more.
- Boundary. "Under the sun" rules the whole book. Every clause here describes the dead man's link with this world, and the verse's last line says so.
- Loss. Death ends a person's share, reward, memory and influence here. It does not end the person.
- Viewpoint. The words report what a man sees from the graveside. Commentators call this either the natural man's verdict or the dim light people had before Christ came.
- Correction. Scripture speaks of sleep for the body, never for the soul. Ecclesiastes itself sends the spirit back to God who gave it.
- Urgency. Work and planning stop at the grave. So knowing that you will die is a call to act now.
Their love also, and their hatred, and their envy is already perished; neither have they any more for ever a portion in all that is done under the sun.
Ecclesiastes 9:6 closes a bleak paragraph about the dead. Their feelings are gone, and they hold no stake in the world they left. Writers ask one question above all others. Is this about the state of the soul after death, or about what death takes from a man here?
The verse ends by naming its own limit. One writer answers an objector who quotes verse 5 and stops one line too soon.
You quote, for example, Ecclesiastes 9:5: "the dead know nothing." Now how does it go on? "They have no more reward." Do you believe that applies to anything beyond this world? You know well you do not; you teach the opposite. "For the memory of them is forgotten. Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun." Is it not as clear as the sun that all this applies to this world? So does the whole book, which speaks of what is under the sun in the days of our vain life.
The phrase is not limited to this chapter:
This expression "under the sun" appears twenty-eight times in the twelve chapters, and it gives the book its character. It describes life "in Adam." It asks what is best for man, and how he should spend his life to be happy on earth. The writer speaks as a human philosopher wandering in his search. Sometimes he gets near the truth. At other times he is far from it.
Love, hate and envy once made a man stand out among his neighbours. The verse says they have "perished." One writer shows where they perished.
He was looking at the scene around him. Men left it and gave no sign that they had ever been there. Their memory was forgotten. Their love, hatred and envy, which had once made them stand out as actors on that stage, had vanished. As far as this scene goes, they knew nothing, and their wisdom and knowledge had gone too. This does not mean... that they "lost their memories," or that they became fools. They knew nothing of what happened after they left, and their wisdom and knowledge could show itself here no longer. The closing sentence shows plainly what the earlier part is about: "forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun."
Many use this passage to argue that the dead are unconscious until the resurrection. One writer answers with a plain example.
Take texts away from their context, and you can make them prove any false teaching you please. The writer of Ecclesiastes is dealing with things "under the sun," and these are the things he means when he says, "the dead know nothing." A man may have been the watchful head of a large business on earth. Once he leaves this world, he knows nothing more about it, whether it prospers or not. The same is true of all who have died, as far as human affairs go.
This book records what human wisdom found, so we read it differently from the rest of Scripture.
Ecclesiastes is a deeply interesting and helpful book. But we must not come to it as divine revelation. It is the inspired record of how human wisdom sums up the problems of life and death. Here and there Solomon shows a faint light of what lies beyond, God-given light of course.
Another writer asks plainly whether the words of verses 5 and 6 are doctrine:
But is this the truth? Is this a doctrine of the faith delivered to the saints? Is this the revelation of God? A thousand times, no! It is the verdict of the natural man, the pagan or unbelieving philosopher. But revelation — the life and immortality that the gospel brought to light — tells us something completely different.
Death itself has not changed. The light on it has.
Death is the end of everything here below. But in Him is life, and those who believe have it in Christ. Before He came, death could only be dreadful, because even for the believer the light beyond was so dim. A living dog is better than a dead lion, the writer says. Now we can call death gain, and far better than the life of this world, for it means to depart and be with Christ.
- Limit. The verse sets its own scope in its last words. All that it denies the dead, it denies them "under the sun," not beyond it.
- Loss. Death ends the man's stake in this scene. His loves, his quarrels, his rivalries and any further part in what happens here are gone.
- Misuse. Quote verse 5 without verse 6, and a statement about this world becomes a teaching about soul sleep that the text never makes.
- Method. Ecclesiastes records a search made by human wisdom. Weigh its conclusions; do not just adopt them.
- Light. The same death that closed the search in darkness became gain once Christ brought life to light.