Ecclesiastes 3:21

I was recently posed with this question:

***************
Speaking of suspect KJV translation, could you explain the discrepancy between the NIV and KJV in regards to this verse.

Ecclesiastes 3:21 (New International Version)
21 Who knows if the spirit of man rises upward and if the spirit of the animal goes down into the earth?"


Ecclesiastes 3:21 (King James Version)

21Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

I am completely illiterate in any ancient language.
***************

Here is my reply:

The first thing that I hope will be obvious from the English here, is that what is being discussed is "breath" and not the bogus "spirit." There is no such thing in the scriptures as "spirit."

So, allow me to remove that mud, so we can see clearer:

Ecclesiastes 3:21 (corrected NIV):
21 Who knows if the breath of man rises upward and if the breath of the animal goes down into the earth?"
Ecclesiastes 3:21 (corrected KJV)
21Who knoweth the breath of man that goeth upward, and the breath of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?

Background: God made a statue that was shaped like and looked like himself out of clay, then animated the statue by breathing his own breath into its nose holes and it became self aware - a person. (Obviously, God is essentially a man).

Ge 2:7 And 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.

Note that animals likewise have this breath of life:

Ge 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
Ge 7:15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.
Ge 7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

"breath" is routinely mistranslated as "spirit" (which is a word coined from the Latin word for "breath") or "ghost" (which is from a Saxon word meaning "breath"), and has been imbued with all manner of foolish metaphysical ideas. But to Moses, RUACH was "breath", and to the LXX and NT folks, "PNEUMA" means "breath" - all referring to the "breath of life."

So if two materials result in intelligence, and clay didn't bring it, then God's own breath, the "breath of life" must, one would think be an intelligent substance. This anatomically incorrect diagnosis is everywhere in the scriptures:

1 Cor 2:
11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit [breath] of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit [breath] of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit [breath] of the world, but the spirit [breath] which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

Note that "the breath of the world" is a different breath. So says Paul:

Eph 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air of the spirit [breath] that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

The question of different "breath of life" for Adam, animals and the wicked is handled differently. So it is this question that Ecclessiastes is dealing with. He says, in effect, "Has anyone direct knowledge about whether the breath of a dying man goes up to God who gave it, while the breath of a dying animal, being different, just goes down into the dirt from whence he sprang?"

He throws his lot in with everyone having all one breath:

Ec 3:19 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; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.

So the translation of "knows" and "has seen" is not qualitatively different. In fact, the LXX word can mean either. it is literally "saw" but it is the common way of saying "knows!"

So Moses says that they are one breath, as does Ecclessiastes, from which info Ecclessiastes draws the inference that man is biologically an animal!

Paul sees the "breath of God" as being a **special and separate breath** that imparts life and divine knowledge. The NT is pretty much dominated by the camp that shares that opinion.

The embarrassment of this discrepancy has led, I believe, to the invention of the word "spirit" to say that breath is just breath, and the different PNUEMA from God is something different.

You have the same struggle in dealing with SARX, or "flesh." Modern translators are moving to change the term to "sinful nature" which effectively obscures the ancient anatomy of the text. Ditto for "heart" being translated as "mind."

I hope this helps...