The "Spirit" that Returns to God in Ecclesiastes 12:7

Dana M. Pike

Dana M. Pike, 鈥淭he 'Spirit' That Returns to God in Ecclesiastes 12:7,鈥 in Let Us Reason Together: Essays in Honor of the Life鈥檚 Work of Robert L. Millet, ed. J. Spencer Fluhman and Brent L. Top (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center; Salt Lake City: 2016), 189鈥204.

Dana M. Pike, professor of ancient scripture and ancient Near Eastern studies at Brigham Young University, was on the international team of editors for the Dead Sea Scrolls, and was serving as associate dean of Religious Education at BYU when this was written.

Ecclesiastes 12:7:

Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it. (King James Version, hereafter cited as KJV)

and the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the breath returns to God who gave it. (New Revised Standard Version, hereafter cited as NRSV)

and the dust returns to the earth as it was, and the life鈥檚 breath returns to God who gave it. (New English Translation, hereafter cited as NET)[1]

Influenced by the Restoration doctrine of premortality, some Latter-day Saints have employed the KJV translation 鈥渢he spirit鈥 in Ecclesiastes 12:7 to support the doctrine that spirit personages leave their mortal bodies at death. Furthermore, Latter-day Saints have sometimes asserted, again citing Ecclesiastes 12:7, that a premortal spirit being can only 鈥渞eturn鈥 to God because it previously came from him. This verse has thus become one of several in the Old Testament that some Latter-day Saints have employed as support for premortal existence, a doctrine that is so important in the broader plan of salvation.[2]

Although the doctrine itself is not in question, this paper does question whether 鈥渢he spirit鈥 in Ecclesiastes 12:7 refers to individual spirit personages and considers the validity of employing this verse as biblical support of premortal existence. In order to determine whether Ecclesiastes 12:7 can bear the interpretation placed on it by many Latter-day Saints, I will (1) review what Latter-day Saints have claimed about the content of this verse, (2) consider 12:7 in the context of Ecclesiastes, especially chapter 12, and (3) analyze the language and meaning of 12:7 in its biblical context.

Latter-day Saint Views on Ecclesiastes 12:7

Latter-day Saint Church leaders and authors have often employed Ecclesiastes 12:7, without making a specific connection to premortality, to emphasize that our individual 鈥渟pirits鈥 return to God at death. For example, in the past decade, Apostles James E. Faust and Russell M. Nelson each employed this verse in the notes of a general conference address for such support.[3] And commentators D. Kelly Ogden and Andrew C. Skinner have claimed that 鈥渢he Preacher鈥檚 comment that 鈥榯he spirit shall return unto God who gave it鈥 parallels the teaching in Alma 40:11 that 鈥榯he spirits of all men . . . are taken home to that God who gave them life.鈥欌[4] When so employed, the 鈥渟pirit鈥 mentioned in Ecclesiastes 12:7 is regularly assumed by Latter-day Saints to be an individual spirit personage that was created by God in premortality and that inhabits every human鈥檚 mortal body.[5]

Using Ecclesiastes 12:7 to emphasize a different doctrinal dimension, a number of Latter-day Saint church leaders have taught something similar to President Harold B. Lee, who, when referring to the premortal existence of our spirits, quoted Ecclesiastes 12:7 and stated, 鈥淥bviously we could not return to a place where we had never been, so we are talking about death as a process as miraculous as birth, by which we return to 鈥榦ur Father who art in heaven.鈥欌[6] Elder Orson Pratt seems to have been among the first Latter-day Saint authorities to employ this logic to provide biblical support for the doctrine of premortality. In 1852 he taught: 鈥淲e have ascertained that we have had a previous existence. We find that Solomon, that wise man [and traditionally viewed as the author of Ecclesiastes], says that when the body returns to the dust the spirit returns to God who gave it [Ecclesiastes 12:7]. Now all of this congregation very well know, that if we never existed there we could not return there. I could not return to California. Why? Because I never have been there. . . . But if we have once been there [premortal existence in God鈥檚 presence], then we can see the force of the saying of the wise man, that the spirit returns to God who gave it鈥攊t goes back where it once was.鈥[7] In more recent times, Elder Hugh B. Brown stated, 鈥淎t a time far antedating Eden, the spirits of all men had a primeval existence and were intelligences with spirit bodies of which God was universal Father. In the Bible we read, 鈥楾hen shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto the God who gave it鈥 (Eccl. 12:7).鈥[8] And Elder Boyd K. Packer taught, 鈥淏efore we came into mortal life, we lived as spirit children of our Father in Heaven,鈥 for which he cited Ecclesiastes 12:7 as support.[9]

Church-produced materials, when they specifically mention this verse, have regularly followed this interpretive approach. For example, the Topical Guide cites Ecclesiastes 12:7 among other scriptures under the entry 鈥淢an, a Spirit Child of Heavenly Father.鈥[10] Likewise, 12:7 is cited under the entry 鈥淧remortal Life鈥 in Guide to the Scriptures.[11] Interestingly, the Church鈥檚 Sunday School, seminary, and institute manuals provide little comment on this verse and thus do not connect it with the doctrine of premortality.[12]

Notwithstanding periodic mention by Church leaders and references in Church materials, Latter-day Saint commentators have not generally given much attention to Ecclesiastes 12:7. If they note the verse at all, they understand 鈥渢he spirit鈥 to be a spirit personage. For example, Daniel H. Ludlow quoted President Harold B. Lee (cited above) in support of his own similar view of this verse.[13] Ellis Rasmussen merely commented, 鈥淭he 鈥榮pirit鈥 lives on and does return to God when the mortal body returns to its constituent 鈥榙ust鈥 (Eccl 12:7).鈥[14] In their brief overviews of Ecclesiastes, neither Victor L. Ludlow, David R. Seely, nor Kerry Muhlestein commented on 12:7.[15] As noted above, Ogden and Skinner provided a relatively extended comment on Ecclesiastes 12:7, seeing in it support for 鈥渁 duality to the human soul, . . . the concept of an ongoing, living spirit of man after the body鈥檚 death.鈥[16]

Ecclesiastes 12:7 in Its Broader Context

Before analyzing the verse in question, it is important to understand its context. The Hebrew name of Ecclesiastes is Qohelet, which is the title of the person who is speaking, as found in 1:1, 2, 12, and elsewhere in the book. The KJV and some other English translations render this Hebrew term (辩辞虅丑别濒别迟) as 鈥淧reacher,鈥 but other possibilities include 鈥淎ssembler鈥 and 鈥淭eacher.鈥 The English title 鈥淓cclesiastes鈥 derives from the Greek rendition of 辩辞虅丑别濒别迟 in the Septuagint (贰办办濒别虅蝉颈补蝉迟别虅蝉). Authorship of Ecclesiastes is traditionally ascribed to Solomon, and certain phrases in the early chapters of the book are intended to imply such a connection (for example, 1:1, 12, 16; 2:7, 9). However, his name is never actually mentioned in Ecclesiastes, some passages argue against Solomonic authorship, and the style and language of the book are generally seen as deriving from later in Israelite history. Thus biblical scholars tend to attribute the authorship of Ecclesiastes to some unknown individual living five to seven centuries after Solomon.[17]

Ecclesiastes belongs, along with Job and Proverbs, to the genre of 鈥渨isdom literature鈥 found in the Bible and other ancient Near Eastern texts.[18] Wisdom literature generally presents life lessons learned through experience and observation, with the view that 鈥渨ise鈥 and principled living brings happiness, contentment, and prosperity. Ecclesiastes, however, more than other biblical literature, rather pessimistically emphasizes the challenge and frustration of finding meaning in mortal life, which seems somewhat futile to the Teacher (for example, 2:17鈥23; 6:7鈥12; 8:7; 9:12; 10:14). The one certainty, so it is claimed, is death, which will impact everyone and everything (for example, 3:19鈥20; 12:7). So, while Ecclesiastes does indicate that God is in control (for example, 3:9鈥18; 7:13鈥14), the inscrutability of God and his ways in this difficult world is repeatedly underscored.

After ranging through a variety of topics in the first eleven chapters of the book, including the encouragement to enjoy life, especially in one鈥檚 youth (11:9鈥10), the closing words from the Teacher, in Ecclesiastes 12:1鈥7, emphasize the long, dark days of misery encountered in old age and the inevitability of the grave. Ultimately, for the Teacher, 鈥渁ll is vanity鈥濃攗nsubstantial, transitory, meaningless鈥攊n this fallen world (12:8). Although scholars disagree on whether this pericope ends with verse 8 or whether verse 8 begins the epilogue that follows, verse 7 highlights the inevitable conclusion to mortal life: 鈥淭hen shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.鈥 The finality of this termination comes after the lamentable burdens of those who live to older age, in which there is 鈥渘o pleasure鈥 (12:1). Thus life comes to an end, and 鈥渕an goeth to his long home [the grave], and the mourners go about the streets鈥 (12:5), and 鈥渢he spirit shall return unto God who gave it鈥 (12:7).

What follows in 12:8鈥14 is not presented as the Teacher鈥檚 words.[19] Scholars regularly suggest this epilogue was added by a later author or editor whose tone seems more positive than that of the text attributed to the Teacher. Verses 9鈥10 describe the Teacher as a sage, while verses 11鈥14 provide summary instruction and encouragement from the later author or editor.[20]

Remains of only two copies of Ecclesiastes were discovered at Qumran, part of the cache of documents called the Dead Sea Scrolls. Both were found in cave 4, but nothing beyond chapter 7 survives.[21] The Greek text of 12:7 in the Septuagint is similar to the Hebrew in the Masoretic Text.[22] We are thus dependent upon the traditional Masoretic Text when analyzing this verse. However, this is not problematic, since there are no unusual features attested in the verse. The comments that follow, therefore, utilize the traditional Hebrew text of the Bible.

Analyzing Ecclesiastes 12:7

As is evident from reviewing the three translations of the Bible quoted above, translating the first portion of Ecclesiastes 12:7 is a straightforward matter; most English versions render the Hebrew quite similarly (鈥淭hen shall the dust return to the earth as it was鈥). The second half of the verse, however, is another matter, and it is this latter portion to which attention is now given. According to 12:7, when a person dies, something鈥斺渢he 谤耻虃补丑蹋鈥濃攔eturns to God 鈥渨ho gave it.鈥

The real challenge to understanding this verse is determining to what the Hebrew noun 谤耻虃补丑蹋 refers. The broad semantic range of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in biblical Hebrew is evident by the fact that it can be translated as 鈥渂reeze, wind, breath, life breath, or spirit.鈥 And 鈥渟pirit鈥 can designate a person鈥檚 life force and internal power, as well as the 鈥渟pirit of the Lord,鈥 the 鈥渟pirit of God,鈥 the 鈥渉oly Spirit,鈥 an evil spirit, and a heavenly spirit personage. This latter use is rare in the Hebrew Bible and is perhaps best illustrated in 1 Kings 22, in a passage in which the prophet Micaiah proclaimed to an Israelite king: 鈥淗ear thou therefore the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left. And the Lord said, Who shall persuade [King] Ahab, that he may go up and fall [in battle] at Ramoth-gilead? . . . And there came forth a spirit [丑补虅谤没补丑蹋, literally 鈥渢he spirit鈥漖 and stood before the Lord, and said, I will persuade him鈥 (1 Kings 22:19鈥21; see also 2 Chronicles 18:20).[23]

Ezekiel 37:9鈥10 illustrates well the challenge translators face when rendering the noun 谤耻虃补丑蹋 into English. In this passage the Lord taught Ezekiel about the future gathering of Israel using the imagery of a great army of dead soldiers coming back to life.

KJV: Then said he unto me [Ezekiel], Prophesy unto the wind [谤耻虃补丑蹋], prophesy, son of man [a title used for Ezekiel meaning 鈥渉uman鈥漖, and say to the wind [谤耻虃补丑蹋], Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds [谤耻虃丑蹋辞虃迟], O breath [谤耻虃补丑蹋] and breathe [辫别虇丑蹋颈虃] upon these slain, that they may live. So I prophesied . . . and the breath [谤耻虃补丑蹋] came into them, and they lived.

NRSV: Then he said to me, 鈥淧rophesy to the breath [谤耻虃补丑蹋], prophesy, mortal, and say to the breath [谤耻虃补丑蹋]: Thus says the Lord GOD: Come from the four winds [谤耻虃丑蹋辞虃迟], O breath [谤耻虃补丑蹋], and breathe [辫别虇丑蹋颈虃] upon these slain, that they may live.鈥 I prophesied . . . and the breath [谤耻虃补丑蹋] came into them.

According to translators of both the KJV and the NRSV, the divinely commanded 鈥渂reath鈥 (谤耻虃补丑蹋) arrived to bring life to the collective dead.

Another passage pertinent to this discussion is Ecclesiastes 3:19鈥21, which contains three of the several attestations of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in Ecclesiastes.

KJV: For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath [谤耻虃补丑蹋]; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knoweth the spirit [谤耻虃补丑蹋] of man that goeth upward, and the spirit [谤耻虃补丑蹋] of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

NRSV: translated similarly where 谤耻虃补丑蹋 occurs.

After observing the lack of justice in mortal life (3:16) but finding some consolation in God鈥檚 eventual just judgment (3:17), the Teacher turns to the resolute nature of death (3:18). People, like animals, will die. Ecclesiastes 3:19鈥21 is fairly analogous to 12:7, teaching that when people, and in this case animals as well, die, their bodies decay and turn to dust (see similarly, Psalm 49:12 [Heb., 49:13]). And the spirit [谤耻虃补丑蹋] of people (Heb., 产别虇苍别虅测-丑补虅示补虅诲补虅尘) goes 鈥渦pward,鈥 presumably meaning to God. However, 3:21 also claims that people and animals 鈥渁ll have one breath [谤耻虃补丑蹋闭.鈥

Significantly, the 谤耻虃补丑蹋 of animals and of people is represented in this passage with a singular term, not a plural one (not 鈥渟pirits of,鈥 as occurs in Numbers 16:22 and 27:16).[24] Thus the KJV and most modern English translations render the occurrence of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in Ecclesiastes 3:19 with 鈥渂reath.鈥 The rendering of the additional occurrences of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in 3:21 with 鈥渟pirit鈥 is intended to parallel 鈥渂reath,鈥 with 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in all three instances designating the life breath or animating essence that all humans and animals have until death鈥斺渢hey all have one 谤耻虃补丑蹋.鈥[25] Although it is not always possible to confidently know what translators and commentators intend when they use the word 鈥渟pirit,鈥 it is clear that in this passage 谤耻虃补丑蹋 was not used to indicate spirit personages.

In fact, in none of the 23 occurrences of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in Ecclesiastes, not counting 12:7, does 谤耻虃补丑蹋 convincingly have the meaning of spirit personage. Sometimes it clearly refers to the wind (for example, 1:6; 11:4). And it occurs (nine times) in the expression 鈥渧exation of spirit鈥 (KJV; re虇士u虃t 谤耻虃补丑蹋; for example, 1:14, 17; 4:4), which is now often rendered as 鈥渟triving after wind鈥 (NET and the English Standard Version; the NRSV has 鈥渃hasing after wind鈥).

In addition to 3:19鈥21, another passage in Ecclesiastes that deserves attention in discussing 12:7 is 11:5. Again, context provides a helpful guide. Ecclesiastes 11:3 mentions what appear to be matter-of-fact outcomes in the natural world such as, 鈥淚f the clouds be full of rain, they empty themselves upon the earth.鈥 And verse 4 counsels against letting the forces of nature unduly impact what needs to be accomplished in life: 鈥淗e that observeth the wind [谤耻虃补丑蹋] shall not sow; and he that regardeth the clouds shall not reap.鈥 Verse 5 further highlights the uncertain nature of life: 鈥淎s thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit [谤耻虃补丑蹋], nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all.鈥 The Teacher concludes this concept in verse 6 by counseling us to proceed with what needs to be done, despite life鈥檚 uncertainties.

The expression 鈥渢he way of the spirit [derek ha虅谤耻虃补丑蹋]鈥 (KJV) in 11:5 has provoked two main interpretations, as exhibited in ancient and modern translations of the Hebrew text: (1) 谤耻虃补丑蹋 refers to the wind, which makes sense, given the reference to clouds and wind (谤耻虃补丑蹋) in the previous verse; and (2) 谤耻虃补丑蹋 refers to the spirit or breath that gives life, which makes sense given the reference to the growth of a fetus in a mother鈥檚 womb in the latter part of verse 5.[26] Given the historical uncertainty of how to render the phrase 鈥渢he way of the spirit/谤耻虃补丑蹋鈥 in 11:5, it is problematic to use it as support for interpreting the occurrence of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in 12:7. And given the theological orientation of those involved in producing the ancient and the modern translations of the Hebrew text, Latter-day Saints can be certain that those who rendered 谤耻虃补丑蹋 as 鈥渟pirit鈥 were thinking of the divinely given animating spirit in all creatures (see the above discussion of Ezekiel 37:9鈥10 and Ecclesiastes 3:19鈥21), not spirit personages created by God.

The traditional non-Latter-day Saint understanding of Ecclesiastes 12:7鈥斺淭hen shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it鈥 (KJV)鈥攁nd particularly of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 as 鈥渟pirit鈥/life breath/life force, as opposed to spirit personage (a use rarely attested in the Old Testament), correlates terminologically and conceptually with passages in the biblical accounts of creation and the Flood, at least as understood traditionally by non-Latter-day Saints. Genesis 2:7 reads, 鈥淎nd the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.鈥[27] The phrase 鈥渂reath [苍颈蝉虒尘补迟] of life鈥 here employs 苍别虇蝉虒补虅尘补虃, 鈥渂reath, life force,鈥 rather than 谤耻虃补丑蹋. But 苍别虇蝉虒补虅尘补虃 and 谤耻虃补丑蹋 are sometimes used in conjunction with each other, and can function synonymously (such as in Genesis 7:22; Job 33:4; and Isaiah 42:5).

As an aside, the correlated occurrence of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 and 苍别虇蝉虒补虅尘补虃 in Job 27:3 is instructive for this study. Amidst his heartbreaking challenges, Job exclaims that although God has vexed his soul, 鈥淎ll the while my breath [苍颈蝉虒尘补虅迟颈虃] is in me, and the spirit [谤耻虃补丑蹋] of God is in my nostrils.鈥 These two phrases convey essentially the same meaning: despite his difficulties Job still lives. Since the 鈥谤耻虃补丑蹋 of God鈥 was still in his 鈥渘ostrils,鈥 this use of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 cannot easily refer to Job鈥檚 premortal spirit being but must be understood as the life breath in all living creatures, the traditional understanding of the 鈥渂reath of life鈥 mentioned in Genesis 2:7 and elsewhere. The 鈥谤耻虃补丑蹋 of God,鈥 not Job鈥檚 own spirit, was still in his body.[28]

After Genesis 2:7, the phrase 鈥渂reath of life鈥 next occurs in Genesis 6:17, where God indicated to Noah, 鈥淚, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh [in this context, human and animal flesh], wherein is the breath [谤耻虃补丑蹋] of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.鈥 Here 谤耻虃补丑蹋 is used instead of 苍别虇蝉虒补虅尘补虃 (as found in Genesis 2:7), although the translation and meaning of the phrase is clearly the same. The divinely originating animating force or life breath is withdrawn at the end of mortality, from animals as well as from people; this is what is taken back by God (figuratively or literally) at death. The expression 鈥渂reath of life鈥 only occurs two more times in the Old Testament, Genesis 7:15 and 7:22, and 谤耻虃补丑蹋 occurs in both instances.

As already emphasized above in relation to Ezekiel 37:9鈥10 and Ecclesiastes 3:19鈥21, 谤耻虃补丑蹋 is also singular in the verses just reviewed. The 鈥谤耻虃补丑蹋 of God鈥 was in Job鈥檚 nostrils (Job 27:3), and the 鈥渢he 谤耻虃补丑蹋 of life鈥 was found 鈥渋n all flesh鈥 (Genesis 6:17; 7:22). These biblical passages emphasize a spirit or life breath in all living creatures, not individual spirits housed in each creature. There is thus a marked distinction between the use of this biblical language and imagery, which is first found in Genesis 2 and which occurs multiple times in the Hebrew Bible, and between the plural form 鈥渟pirits鈥 in Alma 40:11 (鈥渢he spirits of all men . . . are taken home to that God who gave them life鈥).[29]

Summarizing this analysis, the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) uses the term 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in a variety of related meanings. It rarely occurs therein to designate a spirit being or personage. The occurrence of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in Ecclesiastes 3:21 and 12:7, in the context of addressing what happens to the physical body and the 谤耻虃补丑蹋 at death, appears in harmony with statements in Genesis 2:7 (with 苍别虇蝉虒补虅尘补虃) and 6:17; 7:15, 22. Such usage is traditionally understood as referring to the animating 鈥渂reath鈥 God has given to all humans and animals (again, see Ezekiel 37:9鈥10; Job 27:3).

Although Latter-day Saints have not consistently dealt with the meaning of the phrase 鈥渢he breath of life,鈥 a review of that topic is too large an undertaking for inclusion in this study.[30] Suffice it to say, a study of Latter-day Saint approaches to the meaning of 鈥渢he breath of life鈥 does not change my view of the meaning of 谤耻虃补丑蹋 in Ecclesiastes 12:7 as presented in this study.

Concluding Thoughts

As the above review of Latter-day Saint approaches to Ecclesiastes 12:7 illustrates, some Church leaders and commentators have employed the KJV rendering 鈥渢he spirit鈥 to refer to a spirit personage; additionally, some have utilized the verse as support for the doctrine of premortal life.

Given the nonacceptance of premortal life in what became traditional Jewish and Christian theology, it is not surprising that non-Latter-day Saint scholars and theologians do not connect that doctrine with Ecclesiastes 12:7. Furthermore, given the uses and semantic range of the Hebrew term 谤耻虃补丑蹋 and given the whole of the evidence in the Hebrew Bible as it has come down to us, there is no biblical support for claiming that 鈥渢he spirit鈥 that returns to God in 12:7 is a reference to our individual spirit personages.

My understanding of Ecclesiastes 12:7 is that mortal bodies return to the dust, and, to use a poetic figure of speech, a divinely originating 谤耻虃补丑蹋, a life breath or life force, leaves the body. This animating power, perhaps the Light of Christ,[31] 鈥渞eturns to God鈥 at mortal death. The three translations of 12:7 quoted at the beginning of this paper鈥擪JV, NRSV, and NET鈥攅ach intended to convey this perspective, whether 谤耻虃补丑蹋 was rendered as 鈥渢he spirit,鈥 鈥渢he breath,鈥 or 鈥渢he life鈥檚 breath.鈥 And the combined range of biblical evidence supports this understanding.

Thus, in my opinion, the desire to support with biblical passages the doctrine of all people鈥檚 premortality, perhaps coupled with an awareness of Alma 40:11 (鈥渢he spirits of all men . . . are taken home to that God who gave them life), has led some Latter-days Saints to utilize 鈥渢he spirit鈥 in Ecclesiastes 12:7 (鈥渢he spirit returns to God鈥) to teach something about individual 鈥渟pirits.鈥 In a case of application, rather than interpretation, an uncritical use of the KJV language in 12:7 has been employed to support the true doctrine of spirit beings and their premortality. But the biblical verse itself (12:7) does not teach that doctrine.[32] This does not detract from the reality of spirit persons created by God and of the premortal existence of these spirits. It just means that support for such realities must be sought elsewhere.

Notes

It is a pleasure to contribute to this collection of essays dedicated to Bob Millet. Bob has been a friend and an informal mentor to me in Religious Education at BYU for more than two decades. I appreciate his support, his inquisitiveness, and his enthusiasm for teaching the gospel.

[1] The King James Version was published in 1611, the New Revised Standard Version in 1989, and the New English Translation in 2005. Quotations from the Bible in this paper are from the KJV unless otherwise noted.

[2] Other verses in the Old Testament employed by Latter-day Saints to support the doctrine of premortal life include Jeremiah 1:5 and Numbers 16:22. For comments on these, see Dana M. Pike, 鈥淏efore Jeremiah Was: Divine Election in the Ancient Near East,鈥 in A Witness for the Restoration: Essays in Honor of Robert J. Matthews, ed. Kent P. Jackson and Andrew C. Skinner (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, 2007), 33鈥59, and Dana M. Pike, 鈥淓xploring the Biblical Phrase 鈥楪od of the Spirits of All Flesh,鈥欌 in Bountiful Harvest: Essays in Honor of S. Kent Brown, ed. Andrew C. Skinner, D. Morgan Davis, and Carl Griffin (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2011), 313鈥27.

[3] James E. Faust, 鈥淲here Do I Make My Stand?,鈥 Ensign, November 2004, 19, and Russell M. Nelson, 鈥淭hanks Be to God,鈥 Ensign, May 2012, 80.

[4] D. Kelly Ogden and Andrew C. Skinner, Verse by Verse: The Old Testament (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2013), 2:109.

[5] Ogden and Skinner quote statements that George Q. Cannon and Joseph Fielding Smith Jr. made in reference to Alma 40:11, explaining that we move into the spirit world at death, not literally into God the Father鈥檚 presence, as the phrase 鈥渢aken home to that God鈥 at death might imply. I will not discuss this question further in this paper. For the quotations, see Ogden and Skinner, Verse by Verse, 2:109. See also Brigham Young鈥檚 statement, 鈥淵ou read in the Bible that when the spirit leaves the body it goes to God who gave it [Ecclesiastes 12:7]. Now tell me where God is not, if you please; you cannot. . . . The Lord Almighty is here by His Spirit, by His influence, by His presence. . . . It reads that the spirit goes to God who gave it. Let me render this Scripture a little plainer; when the spirits leave their bodies they are in the presence of our Father and God, they are prepared then to see, hear and understand spiritual things. But where is the spirit world? . . . It is on this earth that was organized for the people that have lived and that do and will live upon it.鈥 In Journal of Discourses (London: Latter-day Saints鈥 Book Depot, 1854鈥86), 3:368, 372.

[6] Harold B. Lee, 鈥淯nderstanding Who We Are Brings Self-Respect,鈥 Ensign, January 1974, 4. I presume President Lee was speaking loosely when he stated, just before quoting Ecclesiastes 12:7, 鈥淪o the Old Testament prophets declared with respect to death . . .

[7] Orson Pratt, in Journal of Discourses, 1:56a; emphasis in original. O. Pratt returned to Ecclesiastes 12:7 and this same line of reasoning in 1871 and 1872; see Journal of Discourses, 14:240鈥41 and 15:244, respectively. See similarly, John Morgan, 鈥淩estitution of All Things鈥擯re-Existence of Man鈥擣irst Principles of the Gospel,鈥 in Journal of Discourses, 20:279.

[8] Hugh B. Brown, in Conference Report, October 1963, 92.

[9] Boyd K. Packer, 鈥淭he Standard of Truth Has Been Erected,鈥 Ensign, November 2003, 24. He also cited Numbers 16:22 and Hebrews 12:9, two other biblical passages that are often cited by Latter-day Saints, in addition to Jeremiah 1:5 and Ecclesiastes 12:7, in support of premortality. See similarly, N. Eldon Tanner, in Conference Report, October 1969, 50.

[10] See Topical Guide, 鈥淢an, a Spirit Child of Heavenly Father,鈥 at https://www.lds.org/scriptures/tg/man-a-spirit-child-of-heavenly-father?lang=eng. Ecclesiastes 12:7 is also listed in the Topical Guide under the entry 鈥淢an, Antemortal Existence of.鈥

[11] See Topical Guide, 鈥淧remortal Life,鈥 at https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/premortal-life?lang=eng&letter=p. See also Gayle Oblad Brown, 鈥淧remortal Life,鈥 in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, 4 vols. (New York: Macmillan, 1992), 3:1123, who cited Ecclesiastes 12:7 and Jeremiah 1:5 as biblical support for the doctrine of premortal existence.

[12] See the pertinent manuals at https://www.lds.org/manual?lang=eng.

[13] Daniel H. Ludlow, A Companion to Your Study of the Old Testament (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1981), 279鈥80.

[14] Ellis T. Rasmussen, A Latter-day Saint Commentary on the Old Testament (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1993), 494. Rasmussen further noted that 鈥渓ife endures in the spirit鈥 (495) and seems to suggest Ecclesiastes 12 presents legitimate revelation when he claims, 鈥渋t was revealed to the Preacher that . . .鈥 (494). This is a position few if any other commentators have taken. This is not to say that Ecclesiastes 12 does not contain true doctrine, just that neither the book itself nor commentators claim it is revelation in the same sense that prophetic books make that claim about their content.

[15] Victor L. Ludlow, Unlocking the Old Testament (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1981), 140鈥41. See also David Rolph Seely, 鈥淓cclesiastes,鈥 in Studies in Scripture, vol. 4: 1 Kings to Malachi, ed. Kent P. Jackson (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1993), 4:463鈥66; Kerry Muhlestein, The Essential Old Testament Companion (American Fork, UT: Covenant Communications, 2013).

[16] Ogden and Skinner, Verse by Verse, 2:109.

[17] For introductory comments on Ecclesiastes, see, for example, Antoon Schoors, Ecclesiastes, Historical Commentary on the Old Testament (Walpole, MA: Peeters, 2013), 1鈥25; Stephen Garfinkel, 鈥淓cclesiastes,鈥 in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Books of the Bible, ed. Michael D. Coogan (New York: Oxford, 2011), 1:215鈥23; Augustinus Gianto, 鈥淓cclesiastes, Book of,鈥 in The New Interpreter鈥檚 Dictionary of the Bible, ed. Katharine Doob Sakenfeld (Nashville: Abingdon, 2007), 2:178鈥85; Tremper Longman III, The Book of Ecclesiastes (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 1鈥40, but especially 1鈥15; and M. V. Fox, A Time to Tear Down and a Time to Build Up: A Rereading of Ecclesiastes (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999). Among Latter-day Saint commentators, Seely (鈥淓cclesiastes,鈥 463鈥64) and Ludlow (Unlocking, 140鈥41) imply it is unlikely that Solomon wrote Ecclesiastes.

[18] For general comments on this genre, with examples, see Richard Neitzel Holzapfel, Dana M. Pike, and David Rolph Seely, Jehovah and the World of the Old Testament (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2009), 238鈥40.

[19] Commentators differ somewhat on how these final verses should be divided, with some grouping 12:8 with the previous seven verses, and others (including me) seeing verse 8 as the beginning of the epilogue (1:12鈥12:7 are presented as the first person musings of the Teacher). Also, different commentators attribute this epilogue to one or to two different authors or editors. Those interested in such details are encouraged to consult the works on Ecclesiastes cited in previous notes of this paper.

[20] The secondary nature of 12:8鈥14, and the consequent impact this has on the interpretation of Ecclesiastes as a whole is rarely addressed by Latter-day Saint commentators on this book.

[21] See Eugene C. Ulrich, The Biblical Qumran Scrolls: Transcriptions and Textual Variants (Boston: Brill, 2010), 746鈥48, and Martin G. Abegg, Peter W. Flint, and Eugene C. Ulrich, The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: The Oldest Known Bible (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1999), 619鈥21.

[22] See A New English Translation of the Septuagint, Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright, eds. (New York: Oxford, 2007), 656, which renders Ecclesiastes 12:7, 鈥渁nd the dust returns to the earth as it was and the spirit returns to the God who gave it.鈥

[23] The spirit in question here is part of the heavenly host. There is nothing in this passage that suggests this or any other spirit personage in that category would inhabit mortal flesh. The focus of the passage is on Israel鈥檚 God, surrounded by his heavenly host, and his intent to overthrow Ahab, a king of Israel who had departed from the faith as taught by Israelite prophets. This is not to say that the spirit in 1 Kings 22:21 is not a premortal spirit child of God the Father, just that such a doctrine is not evident in the biblical passage itself.

[24] For a study of these two verses, see Pike, 鈥淓xploring the Biblical Phrase 鈥楪od of the Spirits of All Flesh,鈥欌 313鈥27.

[25] See further the comments on this passage in Longman, The Book of Ecclesiastes, 130; see also his comments on 6:10, on pages 176鈥77.

[26] For further details, see for example, The NET Bible Notes (Biblical Studies Press, 2005; www.netbible.com, version 5.830), Translator鈥檚 Note 11, s.v., Ecclesiastes 11:5: 鈥淭here is debate whether [the Hebrew mah-derek ha虅谤耻虃补丑蹋] refers to the wind (鈥榯he path of the wind鈥) or the human spirit of a child in the mother鈥檚 womb (鈥榟ow the spirit comes鈥). The LXX [Greek Septuagint] understood it as the wind: 鈥榯he way of the wind鈥 (. . . he虅 hodos tou pneumatos); however, the Targum [Aramaic] and Vulgate [Latin] take it as the human spirit. The English versions are divided: (1) spirit: 鈥榯he way of the spirit鈥 (KJV, YLT, Douay); 鈥榯he breath of life鈥 (NAB); 鈥榟ow a pregnant woman comes to have . . . a living spirit in her womb鈥 (NEB); 鈥榟ow the lifebreath passes into the limbs within the womb of the pregnant woman鈥 (NJPS); 鈥榟ow the spirit comes to the bones in the womb of a woman with child鈥 (RSV); 鈥榟ow the breath comes to the bones in the mother鈥檚 womb鈥 (NRSV); and (2) wind: 鈥榯he way of the wind鈥 (ASV, RSV margin); 鈥榯he path of the wind鈥 (NASB, NIV [and NET]); and 鈥榟ow the wind blows鈥 (MLB, Moffatt).鈥

[27] The teaching that human flesh will return to the dust at death was first announced by God to Adam in Genesis 3:19 (鈥渇or dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return鈥), but that passage says nothing about spirit/breath. The first portion of Ecclesiastes 12:7 obviously employs this concept鈥斺渢he dust returns to the earth as it was.鈥

[28] See similarly, Job 32:8, 鈥淏ut there is a spirit [谤耻虃补丑蹋] in man: and the inspiration [苍颈蝉虒尘补迟] of the Almighty giveth them understanding鈥 (KJV). Most modern English translations render 谤耻虃补丑蹋 here as 鈥渂reath,鈥 in harmony with the sense of Genesis 2:7. This passage deserves its own treatment some other time.

[29] I here disagree with Ogden and Skinner, cited in note 5, above, who claim that the content of Ecclesiastes 12:7 鈥減arallels the teaching in Alma 40:11.鈥

[30] I originally intended to provide in this study an excursus on Latter-day Saint approaches to the meaning of 鈥渢he breath of life.鈥 It became apparent, however, that such a treatment would be too long and too distracting from the main point of this study to profitably include herein. I plan to publish a separate study of 鈥渢he breath of life鈥 elsewhere in the future.

[31] After having originally considered this connection, I was interested to find it suggested in Draper, Brown, and Rhodes, The Pearl of Great Price, A Verse-by-Verse Commentary, 223, with a link to D&C 88:13: 鈥渢he light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things.鈥

[32] In light of this assessment, I obviously support the excision of Ecclesiastes 12:7 from Latter-day Saint publications dealing with premortal life.