Nothing new under the sun? Eccl. 1:9

Surely you don't believe Eccl. 1:9 RSV ("What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun")? How many cities had an atomic bomb dropped on them prior to 1945, and how many people walked on the moon before 1969?

quoted from Biblical Errancy Pamphlets by Dennis McKinsey Pamphlet 1 Q19.

Also on p 69 and 231 of EBE

This is a typical McKinsey tactic, take a verse or part of a verse out of context and either compare it with another verse taken out of context or in this case show that the quote does not have universal truth over all time and history. The error here is one of hyper-literalism.

If one reads the book of Ecclesiastes or even the first chapter the author is commenting on the meaningless and futility of life. He is commenting on life from a human point of view, it is the wisdom of man.

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

He then gives examples from his own experience he is hardly looking ahead 3,000 years to the modern nuclear age, and nor should he have to. The author is not saying there will be nothing new under the sun, that would be a prophecy. Ecclesiastes is wisdom literature, more poetry than narrative.

(Eccl 1:3-18 NIV) What does man gain from all his labor at which he toils under the sun? {4} Generations come and generations go, but the earth remains forever. {5} The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises. {6} The wind blows to the south and turns to the north; round and round it goes, ever returning on its course. {7} All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full. To the place the streams come from, there they return again. {8} All things are wearisome, more than one can say. The eye never has enough of seeing, nor the ear its fill of hearing. {9} What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. {10} Is there anything of which one can say, "Look! This is something new"? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time. {11} There is no remembrance of men of old, and even those who are yet to come will not be remembered by those who follow. {12} I, the Teacher, was king over Israel in Jerusalem. {13} I devoted myself to study and to explore by wisdom all that is done under heaven. What a heavy burden God has laid on men! {14} I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are meaningless, a chasing after the wind. {15} What is twisted cannot be straightened; what is lacking cannot be counted. {16} I thought to myself, "Look, I have grown and increased in wisdom more than anyone who has ruled over Jerusalem before me; I have experienced much of wisdom and knowledge." {17} Then I applied myself to the understanding of wisdom, and also of madness and folly, but I learned that this, too, is a chasing after the wind. {18} For with much wisdom comes much sorrow; the more knowledge, the more grief.

To take a verse from the wisdom literature and to say that it must have universal application is to force it beyond its original intent. Further, what is the author's conclusion as he surveys the futility of life around him?

(Eccl 12:13-14 NIV) Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. {14} For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil.

Solomon had wisdom, money and women, he had access to every pleasure in his day and concluded that it was all meaningless.

Here is an example of a debate between McDonald and McKinsey on this very same passage:

Jerry D. McDonald's Defense of Eccl 1:9 is:

It is really embarrassing to have to respond to objections such as this. If this is the best he has to offer, he should just quit. Mr. McKinsey did not allow for the context. The writer is not saying that nothing new will happen. He points out that people are vain. (v.2) People work to make a profit. (v.3) One generation dies and another takes its place. (v.4) The sun rises and the sun sets. (v.5) The wind blows to the south and to the north. (v.6) The rivers run into the sea, yet the sea is not filled up. (v.7) Everything is full of labor. The eye is not satisfied with what it sees, nor the ear with what it hears. (v.8) This simply shows the regularity of life. Man is on a cycle which ends and begins over and over again....

McKinsey's reply:

The scholarship of apologists such as yourself never ceases to amaze me, JM. Like so many of your compatriots, if you don't like the script you either rewrite, reinterpret, or ignore it. What does the text say? THERE IS NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN. Could the author have been more clear? I don't see how. Yet, you not only allege the author is 'not saying that nothing new will ever happen, 'which he most assuredly is claiming, but try to defend your pathetic position by listing a series of acts that are decidedly repetitious by your own admission. How does your listing of a series of monotonous and repetitive acts prove that there is, in fact, something new under the sun? By referring to the 'regularity of life' and the repetitive cycle in which man is involved, you are only substantiating the position of the author who said that there is nothing new under the sun. In effect, you are agreeing with his observation. Yet, you earlier stated he was not saying there is nothing new under the sun. I quoted an author as saying one thing, while you said he meant the opposite. You then to proceed to provide evidence that proves he meant what I said. [sic] As I have said before, your 'logic' is a sight to behold. Your explanation is nothing more than a rambling stream of pseudothought. If this is the best you have to offer, the bowling leagues have some vacancies you might want to consider. I'm still awaiting an answer to my original question. How many cities endured atomic attack prior to 1945 and how many people visited the moon prior to 1969? By failing to provide an adequate response, you have only helped to prove that new and unique events do arise. There is something new under the sun after all.

source Challenge Volume Four, Number Four Winter 1996

McKinsey is taking the text in isolation "there is nothing new under the sun" and applying it to today. There have been a lot of new things over the last 3,000 years. That is not the authors intent however. McKinsey would then reply but I thought GOD was the author and no doubt thunder away about that for a while. Such folly should be obvious to all.