This Meaningless Life
Week 2 - The Author and His World

  1. The Author
    1. The History of Interpretation
      1. The author is Solomon
        1. The earliest commentaries - the Jewish Midrashim
          1. written down in 2nd century, A.D., they reflect an already existing oral tradition
          2. Suggest that Ecclesiastes was written by Solomon in his old age.
        2. Early Christian Commentaries
          1. Gregory Thaumaturgus (d. 270 A.D.) - the book is by Solomon "to show that all the affairs and pursuits of man which are undertaken in human things are vain and useless, in order to lead us to the contemplation of heavenly things."
          2. Gregory of Nyssa (335? - 395?)
          3. Jerome (331 - 419) - book shows "the utter vanity of every sublunary enjoyment, and hence the necessity of betaking one's self to an ascetic life, devoted entirely to the service of God."
        3. Jewish and Christian commentators in the Middle Ages
        4. Most of the Reformers and the Puritans
        5. Post-Reformation conservative writers either following the Puritans or reacting against the liberals.
      2. The author is an unknown post-exilic writer
        1. Martin Luther
          1. The first to go on record as believing Solomon did not author the book
          2. Rather, the book "was produced by Sirach at the time of the Maccabees" (i.e. mid 2nd century B.C.)
          3. The book, then, is the most recent of the Old Testament canon
          4. Luther's opinion waited a hundred years before anyone else agreed
        2. Hugo Grotius (a difficult scholar to describe, branded alternatively as Roman Catholic, Reformed, and Arminian, each time by detractors from those positions) published an Old Testament Commentary in 1644: "I believe [Ecclesiastes] is not the production of Solomon, but was written in the name of this king, as being led by repentance to do it. For it contains many words which cannot be found except in Ezra, Daniel and the Chaldee paraphrasts."
        3. It is important to recognize that this interpretation began among men who believed fervently in the inerrancy of Scripture and would willingly die for that belief.
        4. This interpretation becomes commonplace after 1644 and is taken up by the increasingly liberal German theologians as well as by conservatives such as Franz Delitzsch.
    2. The Internal Evidence
      1. Who the book claims to be by
        1. Our first duty as those who believe in Biblical inerrancy is to determine what the book claims. If it claims to be by Solomon, then we must accept the testimony of Scripture and cannot entertain other ideas.
        2. The book's beginning
          1. "The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem."
          2. Very similar to beginning of Proverbs: "The proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel"
            1. And these proverbs are clearly by Solomon (and claim to be so)
            2. So one might make an initial case that Ecclesiastes is by Solomon as well.
          3. Yet the differences between the introductions raise some questions.
            1. Why speak of "the Preacher" instead of just calling himself "Solomon"?
            2. Why "king in Jerusalem" instead of "king of Israel"?
              1. It would be very unusual for Solomon to refer to himself by the first phrase
              2. The phrase would be more natural after the division of the Kingdom into the North (Israel) and the South (Judah). That was when kings of the Southern kingdom began to identify themselves not as kings of Israel (the Northern kingdom) but as kings in Jerusalem, the capital of the Southern Kingdom.
          4. There is introduced at least the possibility that the one who writes down these words is not the Preacher himself
            1. In that case, there may be some distance of time and/or space between the writer and the Preacher
            2. And although the book may represent the thought processes of the Preacher, it may be compiled in and for a later time.
        3. The book never identifies the Preacher as Solomon
          1. Always it refers to him simply as "the Preacher."
          2. It does not seem anxious to make an explicit connection between Solomon and "the Preacher."
          3. We'll deal with this more in point II. For now, let's just observe that Scripture presents the Preacher more in generic terms than in terms of a specific historical personage.
          4. We will not be wiser than God, therefore, but will refer to this man as "the Preacher" in this study as well.
        4. The book's ending
          1. The book ends with 6 verses that begin: "And moreover, because the Preacher was wise, he still taught the people knowledge; yes, he pondered and sought out and set in order many proverbs. 10The Preacher sought to find acceptable words...."
          2. Clearly, the person who wrote this is not the Preacher himself.
            1. So either someone came along later and added six verses to Scripture.
            2. Or, more likely, this unidentified narrator is either the compiler or the author of the entire book.
          3. Yet just as clearly, the book is about the Preacher and his thought.
        5. With all this in mind we turn to ask who this narrator may be and to what extent he has influenced the content of the book.
      2. The language
        1. The book does not use the kind of Hebrew that Solomon would have known
        2. Rather, the language is that of the Jews between 500 and 100 B.C.
          1. Consider the example on the last page of this handout
            1. How easy is it to tell when the author wrote this piece?
            2. This is how easy it is to tell when Ecclesiastes was written, at least according to some scholars.
          2. The book contains several Aramaic loan words
            1. Aramaic did not begin influencing Hebrew until late in the history of Hebrew.
            2. A few portions of Scripture - parts of Ezra and Daniel - are in Aramaic. (I.e. books that we know come very late in the Old Testament canon.)
            3. This influence, then, occurs about 400 years after the death of Solomon.
          3. Even more telling, the book contains several Persian loan words
            1. Persia conquered Babylon in 539 B.C. and that language would not even have begun to influence Hebrew prior to this time
            2. Solomon died around 931 B.C., again, about 400 years prior.
        3. Conservative commentator Franz Delitzsch remarked: "If the book of [Ecclesiastes] were of old Solomonic origin, then there is no history of the Hebrew language.... [Ecclesiastes] bears the stamp of the post-exilian form of the language."
      3. The book's place in the unfolding of God's plan
        1. This will be discussed more fully under (III. The Author's World)
        2. But the themes of Ecclesiastes do help establish its time period (and therefore its non-Solomonic authorship)
          1. pre-exilic writers tended to be more optimistic about the land of Israel and saw happiness in terms of long life in that land.
          2. As well, they tended to look at prosperity as a sign of God's favor and poverty as a sign of God's displeasure with a man.
          3. In other words, they were firmly grounded in the typological nature of the Kingdom.
          4. Post-exilic writers began to realize that long life in Israel had not been God's ultimate blessing but was a picture of that blessing.
          5. And they began to trust in God even though all outward signs of his blessing were removed (cf. Habakkuk 3:17-19)
          6. Ecclesiastes definitely falls into this second camp.
          7. (NOTE WELL! This does not invalidate the earlier books of Scripture. Rather, the post-exilic Scriptures begin to teach us how to understand those Scriptures in the light of Christ and our eternal reward in him. We do not, and must not, present a view of Scripture that says, "Earlier writers said X, and later writers contradicted them by saying Y." On the other hand, it is also dangerous to suggest that there is no progress in the history of God's revelation of himself. As though we could put the books of the Bible in any order we felt like and they'd still make sense.)
    3. Deliberate Deception or Artistic Presentation?
      1. All the above evidence is for nothing if we decide that Ecclesiastes claims to be by Solomon. No evangelical Christian can accept any conclusion that involves the Bible in a false claim.
      2. But we noted in point A that such a claim is, at best, difficult to establish.
      3. Consider the excerpt on the last page of this handout
        1. Does the excerpt claim to be by Shakespeare?
        2. Is there any thought on the author's part of fooling the reader?
        3. We must, then, consider the linguistic evidence for the authorship of Ecclesiastes as decisive and undeceptive.
      4. So clearly, the author has no intent to deceive and no thought of being mistaken for Solomon.
      5. But he finds it useful to present his thought in the character of Solomon (at least some of the time) in a way that makes it obvious that he is doing this.
  2. The "Preacher"
    1. What We Know about the Preacher
      1. He was a "son of David" (1:1)
        1. "Son" can also mean descendant, of course. Jesus is referred to as the Son of David.
        2. But it is natural to apply this to Solomon and to consider that the author had Solomon primarily in mind.
      2. He was "King in Jerusalem" (1:1)
        1. As noted, this is a formula that would more naturally be used after the divided Kingdom
        2. But it can certainly be used of Solomon, especially by someone living after the Kingdom was divided.
      3. He was immensely wealthy (2:4ff.)
        1. Again, this certainly applies to Solomon
        2. In fact, it is clear that in 2:4-11 at least, Solomon is being thought of specifically.
          1. 1 Kings 7:1-8
          2. 1 Kings 10:7-23 (cf Ecclesiastes 2:7)
          3. 2 Samuel 19:35
      4. He was "was wise," he "taught the people knowledge," and he "pondered and sought out and set in order many proverbs" (Ecclesiastes 12:9).
        1. Again, these are all things that could be said of Solomon
        2. Cf. 1 Kings 4:32, Proverbs 1:1, etc.
    2. What the name means
      1. The word translated "The Preacher" is used only in Ecclesiastes.
      2. It probably means "The convener of the assembly," but we are not sure what assembly the author had in view.
      3. However, he does not seem so much to preach as to lecture.
        1. This is why some translations call him "The Teacher"
        2. And one commentary even suggests "The Professor"
        3. We will call him "the Preacher," but don't think of that as being the precise activity a Pastor engages in on the Lord's Day.
        4. The Pastor is a preacher of the gospel; "the Preacher" is a preacher of futility, and he gets almost evangelistic in his excitement over his view and his desire for you to share it.
      4. Clearly the author views his readers as the Preacher's audience and has him speak to the readers as though they have been assembled to hear a lecture.
    3. Who He Is
      1. He is Solomon, but he's more than that.
      2. He's the ideal son of David, humanly speaking. And he isn't enough.
  3. The Author's World
    1. When the Book Was Written
      1. Between 500 and 100 B.C.
      2. That is, 400 to 800 years after the death of Solomon.
      3. Ecclesiastes is not written in Solomon's time
        1. But it deliberately recalls the background of Solomon's time
        2. It wants us to reflect on what happened during that time and all that has happened since.
        3. So casting the Preacher in the character of Solomon is no mere literary fiction.
        4. It is a necessary device to orient our minds.
    2. The Historical Background in Solomon's Time
      1. His father David's Kingdom had been full of warfare.
      2. The Kingdom of Israel is established in Solomon's time and peace ensues (1 Kings 2:46)
      3. Solomon begins to lead the people away from the Lord
        1. Solomon made a treaty with Pharaoh and married Pharaoh's daughter, violating the Mosaic Law
        2. The people sacrificed on the high places because there was no temple
      4. The Lord comes to Solomon and asks what he shall give him (1 Kings 3:4ff)
        1. Solomon requests wisdom rather than long life or riches
        2. The Lord is pleased with this and grants Solomon wisdom and riches and long life (if - there's always a catch - Solomon walks in God's ways to keep his statutes and commandments).
      5. The Lord gives Solomon and Israel rest on every side (1 Kings 5:4, 8:56)
      6. Solomon demonstrates his wisdom and becomes prosperous
      7. Solomon builds the temple to the Lord and the ark is brought in
      8. Solomon multiplies wives and angers the Lord (1 Kings 11:1ff)
      9. The Lord curses Solomon saying that the Kingdom will be divided after his death.
    3. The Historical Background of the Author
      1. Since that time, the kingdom was indeed divided
      2. The northern tribes, 10 of the 12 split off
        1. They form their own kingdom
        2. They worship idols
        3. They have only evil kings
        4. They're taken into captivity by the Assyrians in the 6th century B.C. and are never heard from again.
      3. The southern tribe(s), Judah and most of Benjamin form the Kingdom of Judah
        1. They have some good kings and some bad (and as the king goes, so go the people)
        2. Gradually they get worse until God disciplines them by sending them off to captivity in Babylon.
        3. The temple is destroyed by the conquering Babylonians.
        4. After 70 years Babylon is conquered by Persia and the Jews are allowed to return to rebuild Jerusalem and the temple
          1. When the foundations of the new temple are laid, the younger people cheer; but the older ones, who remember the first temple, begin to cry (Ezra 3:12,13).
          2. The people begin to long for the temple and the reign of Solomon and God has to tell them not to look back to Solomon's temple but forward to the temple that will come (Haggai 2:1-9)
        5. The Jews are not free from Persian rule
        6. Persian rule gives way to Greek rule under Alexander the Great (356 - 323 B.C.) and those after him.
        7. (And after the time of Ecclesiastes, Greek rule gives way to Roman)
      4. So what are the people looking for?
        1. Another Solomon - a great king, son of David, to come and smite all their enemies and establish them as an independent, sovereign geo-political entity
        2. Who will reestablish the kingdom?
        3. Who will reign with great wisdom?
        4. Who will establish peace?
        5. Why can't our days be like the days of Solomon and our temple as glorious as his?
      5. And how does Ecclesiastes respond?
        1. Solomon wasn't good enough (implied: You need David's greater son)
        2. Solomon's wisdom wasn't sufficient
          1. Because he still had no power to act according to it
          2. Because he died and left his kingdom to a fool
        3. (Implied: You need more than wisdom, and you need a king who rules forever.)
        4. Don't look back to Solomon, his days were full of futility and by the end of his life he knew it.
        5. If there's to be an end to futility, there must come something new under the sun and not the same old same old.
           

Consider the following excerpt from a recently discovered manuscript.

 

Romeo and Juliet, Part 2 - Love from beyond the Grave
A Play by that Immortal Bard of Avon

 

Scene: The patio of a well-appointed house in Verona
On Stage as the curtain rises: Montague (father of Romeo), and Benvolio (nephew to Montague and friend to Romeo)

Mont. Five years have passed; five summers, with the length
 of five long winters! and yet still I hear
 within the compass of my mental ears
 the voice of long departed Romeo.

Ben. It’s a great tragedy, no question about it. On the one hand, you think, well, Romeo committed suicide, so he’s got no one to blame but himself. On the other, you can’t help thinking it’s all that fathead Capulet’s fault. I’d like to take him out and shoot him in the back of the head. Pow! Pow! Or maybe I’d do it slower. Get my fingers round his bony neck and....

Mont. Restrain your spirit, proud Benvolio
 This evil temper ill befits a man
 of your great birth, great dignity, and name.
 Do you not fear that peace so bitter won
 will crumble in your over-clenchéd fist?

Ben. He’d just better watch his step, that’s all I’m saying. (An exaggerated shrug, as though shaking off unpleasant thoughts.) Anyway, I gotta motor if I want to get to work on time.

Mont. Farewell, my nephew and be sternly warned:
 A man whose head cannot restrain his heart
 Must surely break his heart or lose his head.
 (He pantomimes a rope around his neck and the look of a man being hung. They part)

The manuscript breaks off here. The Bard of Avon wrote more words than these, and all his words were chosen well and pleasant to the ears. Hear them and be entertained. Ponder them and be instructed. And know that no playwright has yet been his equal.

[Return to main text]

Go on to Week 3a (1:1-11)

Go back to Week 1 (Introduction)

Contents