Ecclesiastes 1:10 · Bible study
Ecclesiastes 1:10 Commentary: No New Thing Under the Sun
Hebrew · 8 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Explore Qoheleth's bold statement that nothing is truly new.
Research Summary
- Meaning: The Preacher challenges anyone to show something truly new; everything has already existed in ages past, so claims of novelty are based on ignorance.
- Key words: יֵשׁ (yesh, 'is there'), חָדָשׁ (chadash, 'new'), כְּבָר (kevar, 'already'), עֹלָמִים (olamim, 'ages').
- Main debate: Whether the Preacher denies all possibility of newness or only speaks from a limited 'under the sun' perspective, leaving room for divine newness.
- Theological theme: Human pride in novelty is vanity; only God's redemptive acts bring genuine newness, which breaks into the horizontal order from above.
- Best use: To humble pride in human achievements, to comfort those weary of cycles with the hope of God's new creation, and to distinguish between earthly repetition and heavenly transformation.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
Is there a case where one can say, “Look, this is new”? It has already existed in the ages before us.
WEB World English Bible 2000
Is there a thing of which it may be said, “Behold, this is new”? It has been long ago, in the ages which were before us.
KJV King James Version 1769
Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
Is there a thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been long ago, in the ages which were before us.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
There is a thing of which one saith: `See this, it is new!' already it hath been in the ages that were before us!
Darby Darby Bible 1890
Is there a thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? It hath been already in the ages which were before us.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
Nothing under the sun is new, neither is any man able to say: Behold this is new: for it hath already gone before in the ages that were before us.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
¿ Hay algo de que se pueda decir: He aquí esto es nuevo? Ya fué en los siglos que nos han precedido.
Existe algo que se possa dizer: Vê isto, que é novo?Isso já existia nos tempos passados, que foram antes de nós.
S’ il est une chose dont on dise: Vois ceci, c’ est nouveau! Cette chose existait déjà dans les siècles qui nous ont précédés.
Geschieht auch etwas, davon man sagen möchte: Siehe, das ist neu? Es ist zuvor auch geschehen in den langen Zeiten, die vor uns gewesen sind.
Is er enig ding, waarvan men zou kunnen zeggen: Ziet dat, het is nieuw? Het is alreeds geweest in de eeuwen, die voor ons geweest zijn.
V’ha egli qualcosa della quale si dica: “Guarda questo è nuovo?” Quella cosa esisteva già nei secoli che ci hanno preceduto.
Jestże jaka rzecz, o którejby kto rzec mógł: Wej! to coś nowego? I toć już było za onych wieków, które były przed nami.
Бывает нечто, о чем говорят: "смотри, вот это новое"; но это было уже в веках, бывших прежде нас.
豈有 一件事 人能指著說 這 是 新的？哪知，在 我們以前 的世代 早已 有了。
Is there anything of which men say, See, this is new? It has been in the old time which was before us.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Biblical Hebrew)
Old Testament · Biblical Hebrew · Ecclesiastes 1:10
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators across traditions agree this verse is the Preacher's rhetorical challenge to human claims of novelty. The Cambridge Bible notes that the Hebrew word for 'ages' (עֹלָמִים) evokes vast aeons of unrecorded time, and parallels the Stoic idea that 'they that come after us will see nothing new.' Gill reads it as an appeal to examine the natural, moral, political and mechanical worlds, all repeat patterns. Matthew Henry observes that we value ourselves on novel inventions, but the Preacher exposes this as ignorance of the past.
Yet they also note a crucial limit: the Preacher speaks 'under the sun', an empirical, horizontal perspective. This is not a denial that God can do a new thing (Isaiah 43:19). Rather, it is a confession that within the created order cycles repeat and human pride in novelty is empty. The Preacher's 'vanity' verdict holds until revelation from above breaks in. This humbling insight frees us to receive the genuinely new thing God does when he interrupts history with redemption.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Limited to fallen world: The Preacher's repeated phrase 'under the sun' restricts his observation to the empirical, fallen order. He is not speaking about God's redemptive acts, which come from above and break the cycle.
- Critique of human pride: The verse is a polemic against the claim of originality. It does not address whether God can do new things, but only that humans cannot produce them naturally or claim credit for them.
What is clear: The Preacher asserts that from a human, earth-bound perspective, every claim of novelty rests on ignorance of the past.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Scope of 'under the sun' | Christians agree that 'under the sun' refers to life in the fallen, observable world. | Some emphasize that this worldview is intentionally limited to human wisdom apart from special revelation; others caution against using this to dismiss the verse's force, seeing it as a universal truth about the cycles of nature and history. |
| Meaning of 'new' | All hold that the Preacher denies humans can produce a genuinely unprecedented phenomenon within the created order. | A minority (ancient and modern) read this as an absolute metaphysical claim that even God's actions follow patterns, but most Christians argue that the rest of Scripture, especially Isaiah 43:19 and Revelation 21:5, shows God can and does do something truly new, which does not fall under the Preacher's 'under the sun' category. |
| Relation to New Testament | Both Catholics and Protestants read this verse as part of the Old Testament witness to the vanity of human effort, which points to the need for a Redeemer. | Some see a direct contrast: the Preacher says nothing new under the sun, but Christ's resurrection and the new creation fulfill what the world could not produce. Others see continuity: the cycles of history themselves prepare for God's intervention, as seen in the 'fullness of time' (Galatians 4:4). |
Historical & Cultural Context
Ecclesiastes belongs to the Old Testament wisdom tradition. The book opens with a figure called Qoheleth (the Preacher), traditionally identified as Solomon in his old age, reflecting on the futility of life 'under the sun.' In the surrounding poem (1:4, 11) the cycles of nature, sun rising and setting, wind circling, rivers flowing to the sea, illustrate a world that never fundamentally changes. Verse 10 is a rhetorical question meant to counter anyone who might object: 'But what about this? This is new!'
The Hebrew word for 'ages' (עֹלָמִים) is a plural form of עוֹלָם, which can mean 'eternity' or 'long duration.' The Cambridge Bible notes that the Stoic philosophers held a similar view of eternal recurrence, and quotes Marcus Aurelius: 'they that come after us will see nothing new.' But Qoheleth is not borrowing Greek philosophy; he is making an observation from within the created order, from 'under the sun.'
Ancient Jewish interpreters recognized the tension this verse creates with prophetic promises of newness. Ellicott records a Talmudic story where a pupil uses 'there is nothing new under the sun' to object to messianic renewal. The verse thus challenges us to consider what kind of newness God promises: not a mere repetition within the cycle, but a transcendent intervention that breaks into the horizontal order. The Preacher's perspective is intentionally limited; he speaks from empirical observation, not from the full light of revelation.
Textual Notes
The consulted sources note no significant textual variants for this verse. The Hebrew text is stable across manuscripts. The verse fits seamlessly into the poetic structure of Ecclesiastes 1:4, 11, and the key terms (עֹלָמִים, כְּבָר) are well-attested in other biblical books.
Reception History
Ancient Jewish interpretation, as seen in the Talmudic story cited by Ellicott, recognized the tension between this verse and messianic hope. The rabbis' pupil used 'there is nothing new under the sun' to challenge the idea that the Messiah would bring unprecedented blessings. Early Christian commentators, including those behind the Geneva Bible notes, understood the Preacher to be speaking from a human perspective, not contradicting the new covenant. The Reformation tradition (e.g. Matthew Henry) emphasized that the verse humbles human pride in discovery and invention, turning readers toward the eternal God. In the modern era, some have misused the verse to argue against any possibility of progress, while others have rightly seen it as a call to fix our hope not on earthly novelty but on the resurrection, the truly new thing that breaks the cycle of sin and death.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The Illusion of Novelty. Humans love to claim originality, but the Preacher challenges us to examine whether anything is truly unprecedented under the sun. The same sins, struggles, and patterns recur in every generation.
- The Evidence of History. The Hebrew word עֹלָמִים (ages) reminds us that the past is vast and poorly remembered. Our sense of novelty often comes from ignorance of what came before. Gill points to every sphere, nature, morality, politics, learning, where cycles repeat.
- The Hope Beyond the Sun. The Preacher's 'under the sun' limitation is the key. From a fallen, horizontal vantage point, novelty is an illusion. But the Bible also speaks of a new creation, a new covenant, and a new heart, things that come from above. These are not 'under the sun' innovations; they are divine interruptions.
Five-point outline
- The Preacher's Challenge: 'Is there a thing of which it may be said, “Behold, this is new”? '
- The Futility of Human Pride: We boast in discoveries, but they are variations of what has been. The Preacher deflates our arrogance.
- The Cycle of Life: Nature and history turn in circles. The more things change, the more they stay the same, apart from God's intervention.
- The Limits of Observation: The Preacher is not omniscient. He speaks from a human perspective. This is why his statement must be read in light of the whole canon.
- The Possibility of Divine Newness: The book ends with 'fear God and keep his commandments.' True newness is not invented but received from the One who makes all things new.
Illustration hooks
- A student thinks their generation invented social media, but it is only a new form of age-old gossip, self-promotion, and community building. The underlying patterns are ancient.
- A parent feels that the problems their teenager faces are unique and more difficult than any past generation. The Preacher would nod, same heart, same temptations, different packaging.
- A person invests in the latest self-help trend, expecting a transformation, only to find it fades like all the others. This echoes the Preacher's observation that 'all is vanity.'
Questions your congregation is asking
- If there's nothing new, what about God's promises in Isaiah 43:19 to do a new thing? Does this verse contradict those?
- Does the Preacher mean we should give up on progress or innovation? Is all effort pointless?
- How can I find meaning and hope if everything is just repetition of the past?
Leading a Discussion
This verse challenges our assumptions about novelty and progress. The Preacher forces us to see that our proudest 'new' ideas may be old patterns in disguise. As you discuss, remember that the Preacher is speaking from a limited perspective ('under the sun'), and the rest of Scripture fills out the picture of what God can do.
Discussion questions
- What is the Preacher trying to prove by asking if anyone can point to something truly new? (Observation)
- How does the Hebrew word עֹלָמִים (ages) emphasize the depth of his claim? (Interpretation)
- Why does the Preacher limit his observation to 'under the sun'? What does that phrase mean in Ecclesiastes? (Interpretation)
- In what ways have you or people you know claimed something as 'new' when it was really a variation of the past? (Application)
- How does the rest of the Bible, especially the promises of new covenant and new creation, speak to the Preacher's statement? (Interpretation)
- Does this verse discourage innovation? How can we pursue fresh ideas with humility? (Application)
- What would it look like to find hope not in novelty but in the things that endure, God's faithfulness, Christ's finished work?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Matthew 5:12 | Rejoice, and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven. For that is how they persecuted the prophets who were before you. |
| Matthew 23:30 | and say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we wouldn’t have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.’ |
| Matthew 23:32 | Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. |
| Luke 17:26 | As it was in the days of Noah, even so it will also be in the days of the Son of Man. |
| Luke 17:30 | It will be the same way in the day that the Son of Man is revealed. |
| Acts 7:51 | “You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit! As your fathers did, so you do. |
| I Thessalonians 2:14 | For you, brothers, became imitators of the assemblies of God which are in Judea in Christ Jesus; for you also suffered the same things from your own countrymen, even as they did from the Jews |
| I Thessalonians 2:16 | forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved, to fill up their sins always. But wrath has come on them to the uttermost. |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
7 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke notes that everything that appears new eventually repeats because it has always existed and will continue to exist. This holds true for human inventions as well as for all things in nature.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The writer says everything a person creates ends up being the same as what existed before. He believes all human inventions and discoveries are just repetitions of things that have happened in the past.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The note stresses the point that nothing truly qualifies as new. Any apparent novelty is simply something that has already existed in the ages before us.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill reads Solomon's question as a forceful denial that anything genuinely new occurs. His distinctive move is to challenge the reader to test this claim across every field: nature, morality, politics, learning, and trades. Even what appears new, Gill argues, only seems so because it has been forgotten from earlier ages.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
Jamieson Fausset Brown notes the Hebrew plural cannot be linked to a singular verb so it must mean it happened long ago not right before us. This understanding shows the event occurred in ancient times rather than in our own present day.
Keil & Delitzsch OT Commentary Protestant 1876
Keil and Delitzsch emphasize that the perception of something new arises from human forgetfulness. What appears fresh actually existed long ago, but generations pass and one forgets the other. The seeming novelty is not in the thing itself but in the loss of collective memory.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Henry notes that people often boast about their new inventions and discoveries as if they are unique. He says such things were already present in the past and will be again in the future.