Although
daunting to understand for some, Ecclesiastes has long been respected
as one of the most literarily complex books in the bible. Some avoid
this book because when it is read with a passive approach it often
reveals a rather depressing look at life; others prefer to deal with
the book by selecting quotable passages out of context that reflect a
worldview most Christians are more comfortable with. Modern biblical
scholars, however, advocate that not only does the book of
Ecclesiastes contain an encouraging and heartening look at the world,
but also that the book makes a unique contribution to the biblical
Hebrew wisdom literature and the understanding of the ideal of Godly
wisdom, and thus, biblical living.
To establish the niche of the book of Ecclesiastes, it is necessary
to lay out an outline of the elements proving its value as a
canonical book. The first goal should be to examine the external
evidence-- that is, to establish age and authorship. The second
priority is to determine major themes and how they are developed
within the book of Ecclesiastes. And finally, to conclude why this
book belongs in the Old Testament canon, we should examine how the
book, internal concerns and external evidences, develops and proves
itself inseparable from the rest of the canonical biblical texts.
The evidence for the validity and inspiration of the scroll of
Ecclesiastes has been debated for thousands of years. The very same
questions ancient rabbis struggled to determine are the questions
modern biblical scholars and textual critics argue over today. These
debates often center on the authorship and age of the document.
While some fundamentalist Christians still insist, that Solomon was
the author of Ecclesiastes, most biblical scholars argue against
Solomon’s authorship. (Childs 582) While the book does,
indirectly, suggest that the author is David’s son Solomon, the
identifying verses are limited to the first two verses of the book
and scholars view these remarks as the author aiming to assume the
persona of a person associated with wisdom rather than an actual
identification of Solomon as the author. Hill and Walton argue that
if Solomon had written the book, he would do so boldly rather than by
using evasive techniques. (293) Ultimately, LaSor sums the argument
up by writing “It is far easier to say that Solomon did not
write Ecclesiastes than to say who did.” (588)
It could be argued that the debate over the date of the original
composition of Ecclesiastes has been even more heated than the debate
over authorship. While those who claim Solomon as the author of
Ecclesiastes find reason to believe the book dates to a time
preceding the exile to Babylonia, most scholars propose that the book
dates to a time during or after the exile. Perhaps the reason the
debate hasn’t been resolved sooner is the uniqueness of the
book; “the Hebrew of Qohelet is unlike any other of the Old
Testament.” (329 Arnold) Arnold argues that “Most
scholars date the work to the third century B.C” (329) and
LaSor takes a more daring step in claiming that “a date later
than 200 is ruled out, both by Ecclesiastes… and by fragments
of Qohelet among Qumran scrolls.” (588)
As
aforementioned, many Christians treat the book of Ecclesiastics as a
difficult or even useless book of the Old Testament-- at best a
source of nice quotes or situationally applicable passages. Most
would like to avoid its depressing, even “hedonistic”
worldview in favor of its overshadowing canonical predecessor, the
book of Psalms. LaSor claims that Ecclesiastes was placed after
Psalms “because it was thought that the writings linked to
Solomon should follow those attributed to his father David.”
(586 LaSor) But although their placement debatably makes sense
chronologically, the tone of writing in these two books could not be
more divergent.
In
some ways, the arguments that Ecclesiastes “is a depressing
book” are valid. “The book reflects a time of despair.
The promises of the covenant seem far distant, the glories of the
national Israel forgotten, and the shining hope of the prophets lost”
(326 Arnold) Some scholars have even gone so far as to say the book
of Ecclesiastes is not a godly work but the product of skepticism and
religious breakdown in Israelite society. (Childs, 583) The speaker
in the book of Ecclesiastes identifies himself in verse one as the
“Qohelet” and although this word has been translated as
“speaker”, “preacher”, “president”,
“spokesman”, “philosopher”, and “teacher”,
Kidner calls this word the “untranslatable title” because
the word is unique to the book of Ecclesiastics and cannot be
specifically determined. (13)
Ironically enough for a piece of “wisdom literature,” the
themes of Ecclesiastes are firstly that “conventional wisdom
was not only inadequate, but close to blasphemous,” (589 LaSor)
secondly that of an “overarching theological rubric under which
all human behavior was to be viewed, namely, the judgment of God,”
(Childs 586) and finally, the theme Qohelet most closely cites
himself, “Life without God at the center is meaningless.”
(326 Arnold) As DLI penciled into the margins of his copy
of A Time to Mourn and a Time to Dance, all of the book of
Ecclesiastes points to one question: “What is a good life and
to what end (or goal or purpose) does it point.” Fundamental to
this concept is the understanding that Ecclesiastes is not just about
godly wisdom, but using that wisdom to lead a “good life”.
Ecclesiastes is difficult to summarize because, the Qohelet explores
vastly different areas of life through vastly different literary
genres throughout his quest. The dominant organizing motif in the
book of Ecclesiastes is the quest, as the protagonist of the work
searches to find meaning and satisfaction in life. (Ryken) Kidner
identifies the main points as moving from restlessness to lifestyles,
to a discussion of time and death, through cruelty to a discussion of
the “rat race”. (Kidner 43) In chapter four Qohelet seems
to move from exploring man’s position in life, to surveying it
detachedly, to reminding the reader of the many various
disappointments in life. (63) In chapter seven the Qohelet uses
proverbs to confront the secularist with his worldview. The next
several chapters explore themes of the attainability of wisdom, the
folly and irrationality of humankind; and in chapter nine Qohelet
seems to have “finished his work of demolition” (Kidner
87)
Many
find Ecclesiastes to be frustrating because there are no clear
answers, but Kidner equated Qohelet’s conclusion to the words
of C.S. Lewis in The Great Divorce, “I can promise you …
no scope for your talents, only forgiveness for having perverted
them. No atmosphere of inquiry, for I will bring you to the land,
not of questions but of answers, and you shall see the face of God”
In other words, Qohelet could ponder over these questions for many
chapters, but it would be useless since the beginning and end of all
wisdom is in God, and in fear of Him alone lay the answers. (Kidner
107) With that conclusion comes the key passage of Ecclesiastes,
12:13: “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.” Although Qohelet doesn’t specifically say
that this will cure the chief aliment of life, vanity, Paul seems to
add what should be Ecclesiastes final line in 1 Corinthians 15:58;
“Therefore, my dear brothers, stand firm. Let nothing move you.
Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you
know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain.”
(emphasis added) “The grand conclusion to this book is that we
are to fear the living God and heed his Word. This is no legalistic
formula, but a path for happiness.” (Kaiser)
Not
only is the book of Ecclesiastes itself a unique literary work, but
it also contributes a stark and poignant message to Israel: stop
following man’s wisdom and content yourself to fear God and
enjoy the life he has given you. “Like Job, he protested the
easy generalizations with which his fellow teachers taught their
pupils to be successful. They had oversimplified life and its rules
so as to mislead and frustrate their followers.” (589 LaSor)
Arnold argues that Ecclesiastes is a collection of diverse literary
types, all making the same point. (327) It seems that Qohelet is so
eager to make his point that he will use poetry, narrative, and
proverbs to illustrate in whatever way his reader will be able to
understand. Arnold argues that the fundamental teaching of all of
these forms is simply: “Life, and our preoccupation with the
material and temporal things, is meaningless.”(327 Arnold)
Although this might be a common conclusion after reading the New
Testament and the teachings of Jesus, to Qohelet’s readers,
this was a radical statement. Arguably, this unorthodox teaching was
essential to be included in the canon in order to pave the way for
the teachings of the Messiah. Despite the ongoing debates over
authorship and date, it is clear that Ecclesiastes plays an important
part in the development of the Old Testament wisdom literature and,
more generally, in the progressive revelation of God’s will
throughout the bible.
Works Cited
Arnold, Bill T. and Bryan E. Beyer.
Encountering the
Old Testament: A Christian Survey. Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1999.
Childs, Brevard S. Introduction to the Old Testament As Scripture.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979.
Hill, Andrew E. and Walton, John H. A Survey of the Old Testament.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1991.
Kaiser, Walter C., et. al. Hard Sayings of the Bible.
Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997, [Online]
Available: Logos Library System.
Kidner, Derek. The Message of Ecclesiastes: A Time to Mourn and a
Time to Dance. Downers Grove, InterVarsity, 1976.
LaSor, William Sanford, David
Hubbard and Frederic Bush. Old
Testament Survey. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.
Ryken, Leland; Wilhoit, James C.; Longman III, Tremper, Dictionary
of Biblical Imagery, Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press.
2000, c1998. [Online] Available: Logos Library System.
