INTRODUCTION TO

Ecclesiastes

ECCLESIASTES IS AN ENIGMATIC BOOK. What other book in the Bible puts such an emphasis on the meaninglessness of this present life (see 1:2 and throughout) or advises readers not to be either “too good or too wise” (7:15-18)? This is a book that seems, on the surface, to have internal tensions—if not contradictions. Should we enjoy life (2:24-26), or should we take a sober or even somber attitude toward it, perhaps preferring death (7:1-4)?

Even though there are many questions concerning the interpretation of this book and, consequently, numerous disagreements among the commentators on certain details, the main message is rarely lost: Apart from God, there is no true meaning in life. Likewise, the final advice of the book is clear and beyond debate:

Here now is my final conclusion: Fear God and obey his commands, for this is everyone’s duty. God will judge us for everything we do, including every secret thing, whether good or bad. (12:13-14)

This small, admittedly difficult book is an important one for us to hear today. The issues of life haven’t changed all that much since the time the book was first written in antiquity. Today we still face the question, where can we find the meaning of life?

AUTHOR

“Ecclesiastes” is the Latin translation of the Hebrew name Qoheleth (sometimes written Kohelet), which the NLT translates as “the Teacher.” Accordingly, both “Qoheleth” and “the Teacher” will be used to refer to this person in this commentary. The Hebrew Qoheleth literally means “one who assembles (a group)” and may refer to assembling a group of students to hear one’s teaching (as recorded in 1:12–12:7). Interestingly, this name likely intends to associate the Teacher with Solomon, since the verb qahal [TH6950, ZH7735], on which the name Qoheleth is formed, occurs a number of times in 1 Kings 8, which is Solomon’s speech at the dedication of the Temple. As a matter of fact, there are a number of characteristics of the Teacher’s description that cause one to think of Solomon. He is called “David’s son, who ruled in Jerusalem” in the superscription (1:1). As he later searches for meaning “under the sun,” he describes his great wealth, wisdom, and the numerous women who were his. This fits in well with what we know of the historical Solomon from 1 Kings 3–11. Even so, it is unlikely that the Teacher actually was Solomon. A number of texts, for instance, dissociate the Teacher from the royal throne (4:1-3; 5:8-9; 10:20). Indeed, if the Teacher was Solomon, what purpose would be served by using a nickname (Qoheleth, meaning “Teacher”) rather than simply stating that fact? Solomon’s name was associated with such wisdom and authority as to merit a wide audience—certainly preferable to any nickname. The view that Solomon is not the author of the book has been held by other conservative commentators in the past (Luther, Moses Stuart, Delitzsch, Young, and Kidner—to name a few). However, in the interests of fairness, it should be pointed out that some conservative scholars consider this opinion to be incorrect (most notably in recent days, W. Kaiser). (See the Bibliography for each of these authors’ commentaries.)

Furthermore, the Teacher, even if he was Solomon, is clearly not the author of the book of Ecclesiastes, in spite of some popularly held interpretations that insist on this view. There is a second voice in the book—that of an unnamed wise man who uses the Teacher’s words and life story to teach the dangers of embracing “under the sun” perspectives (12:12). This unnamed wise man talks about the Teacher in 1:1-11 and 12:8-14. By contrast, the Teacher’s distinct voice can be recognized by the fact that he speaks in the first person in 1:12–12:7. The second wise man, whose words frame the Teacher’s speech, could be called the “frame narrator” (Fox 1977). The authorial voice is more closely connected with this second wise man, who chose not to give his name.

Thus, in the final analysis, the book of Ecclesiastes, like many other Old Testament books, is anonymous. Due to its presence in the canon, though, we can affirm that its ultimate author is God himself, because he speaks through the human author.

Notwithstanding, the implicit references to Solomon in the book are not to be ignored. The association of the “Teacher” with Solomon serves an important function in the book. Temporarily, the Teacher assumes the character of Solomon (with no intention to deceive since it is so clearly marked by the Teacher’s dissociation from royalty; cf. 4:1-3; 5:8-9; 10:20) in order to explore areas of potential meaning. From the historical record in 1 Kings, we know that Solomon had more of everything than anyone else did, yet he still turned against the Lord and ended up splitting the kingdom. He had it all, but his life ended in meaninglessness.

It should also be noted that the Teacher, whose words form the central section of the book, can be characterized as a confused wise man. He is someone who knows the wisdom teachings of Israel well but has set out to understand life on his own and is frustrated and confused by life’s incongruities and mysteries. This being the case, it is not surprising that in some cases we see the Teacher contradicting himself, as he turns sometimes to his knowledge of traditional wisdom for answers and at other times to his own anecdotal observations of life (e.g., 3:16-22; 7:3-9; 11:9).

DATE AND OCCASION OF WRITING

As we have seen above, the book of Ecclesiastes is anonymous. Since we do not know who the author is, its date is unknown. Due to the extensive associations with Solomon in the book, it clearly could not have originated before Solomon (c. 960 BC). The language of the book is unusual, and some scholars argue that its Hebrew is like post-biblical Hebrew and therefore points to a late date for the book, perhaps sometime after the fourth century BC. This viewpoint is often supported by the presence of what look like Greek and Persian loanwords and a similarity in terms of language and grammar to Aramaic. An interesting twist on this argument is the viewpoint that the difficult Hebrew of Ecclesiastes should be explained as the product of someone who was thinking in Greek and writing in Hebrew (Buhlman 2000). DeJong believes that Qoheleth’s argument describing human limitation fits best in the Jewish Hellenistic period when there was too much ambition (1994). These data could well point to a late date, but we are actually in the dark about many aspects of the development of the Hebrew language. The unique nature of the Hebrew of the book could be due to its use of a dialect or vernacular, rather than literary, form of Hebrew. It is best to remain “agnostic” about the date of the book, especially since it is unimportant to its interpretation.

AUDIENCE

Since we cannot date the book, we cannot be specific about the audience to whom it is addressed. The way the book is written, the second wise man is speaking to his son (12:12) concerning the dangers of speculative thinking—that is, thinking apart from God (“under the sun”). In a sense, then, other readers find themselves in the same place as the son, learning a lesson about living without God and his revelation: Apart from God, life is meaningless. This warning serves to undermine the tendency of all God’s human creatures to create their own meaning for their lives. Wisdom, relationships, power, money, influence, and other areas are all put under a microscope, and the conclusion is that “all is meaningless” without God.

CANONICITY AND TEXTUAL HISTORY

With few and minor exceptions, the Hebrew Masoretic text of Ecclesiastes is without problems; it is supported by the Greek, Latin, and Syriac versions. The Aramaic Targum characteristically is an interpretive paraphrase and in the case of Ecclesiastes in particular is a witness to early exegesis. Fragments of Ecclesiastes were discovered at Qumran, and they also essentially agree with the Masoretic Hebrew tradition.

Ecclesiastes was one of five books that had their canonicity questioned by some early rabbinic authorities. Doubts arose because it was felt that Ecclesiastes contradicted itself, as well as other Scripture. For instance, the Talmud gave voice to the thought that Ecclesiastes 2:2, which teaches that pleasure is useless, contradicted 8:15 where the Teacher commends pleasure (b. Shabbath 30b). More seriously, some felt that 11:9, which literally encourages the reader to “follow the ways of your heart and the sight of your eyes,” contradicted Numbers 15:39, which literally admonishes people to “not prostitute [themselves] by going after the lusts of [their] own hearts and eyes” (Midrash Rabbah, Kohelet).

Some rabbis also accused Ecclesiastes of being secular inasmuch as one hears the incessant refrain “everything is meaningless.” However, the predominant opinion was that Ecclesiastes indeed was canonical, and it is found in all the major early lists of authoritative books. The fact that it was found at Qumran implies that it had achieved that status before the time of Christ. In other words, though the canonicity of Ecclesiastes was questioned by some, it was never rejected by the mainstream Jewish communities.

GENRE AND LITERARY STYLE

One of the most important keys to interpreting a biblical book is the identification of its literary genre, which often includes structure. We can tell this from modern examples. We expect different things from a novel than we do from a biography and, therefore, we read them differently. In the Bible there are many different genres represented, including history, law, wisdom, prophecy, gospel, epistle, and poetry. (For information on how to read the different genres of the Bible, see Longman 1997.)

It is therefore appropriate to ask what kind of book we have when we begin to read the book of Ecclesiastes. As was noted in the section above under “Author,” one important observation is that there are two voices in the book. The largest part of the book (1:12–12:7) contains the voice of a person who goes by the nickname “the Teacher” (Heb., Qoheleth). However, in the beginning of the book (1:1-11) and at the end (12:8-14), someone is speaking to his son (12:12) about the Teacher. These words provide a kind of literary frame around the Teacher’s words.

In comparison with other ancient writings, I have elsewhere identified the Teacher’s words as a kind of reflective autobiography (see Longman 1991). Thus, the book as a whole may be called a framed autobiography. As we will see below, the most important insight we can derive from this literary observation is that the authoritative teaching of the book comes from the words of the voice in the frame. That voice directs us as to how to understand the thoughts and opinions of the Teacher, much like the authoritative voice of the book of Job is that of God who, at the very end of the book of Job, guides our understanding of the thoughts of the human characters of the book.

The book of Ecclesiastes is composed of both prose and poetry. The formatting used in some versions (such as the NIV and NJB) gives the wrong impression that there is more poetry in the book than is really there. The NLT redresses this imbalance.

The Hebrew of the prose is difficult, but we do not know whether that is the result of the style or a particular dialect of the language. The poetry is most often associated with the proverbs that are found throughout the book (1:15, 18; 7:1-14). The famous poem that begins “For everything there is a season, a time for every activity under heaven” is rightly put in poetic format (3:1-8). The striking images that are found throughout the book will be unpacked in the commentary.

MAJOR THEMES

The structure of Ecclesiastes has three parts. In the prologue (1:1-11), an unnamed wise man (see above under “Author”) introduces the Teacher and sets the mood for his conclusion. As we will see, the tone is quite depressing. It anticipates the Teacher’s conclusions by introducing some of his favorite phrases such as “everything is meaningless” (1:2) and “under the sun,” where nothing is “truly new” (1:9). The second section is the longest. It is the autobiography of the Teacher in which he talks about his futile search for meaning and gives some advice to those who listen to him (1:12–12:7). The structure of the autobiography itself is not very clear-cut. We can delineate distinct units of his teaching, but he keeps coming back to the same subject. The confusion of the structure of his speech may well reflect the confusion in his thinking as he grapples with the apparent conflict between Israel’s tradition and the suffering of the righteous. The last part is, in a number of ways, the most important part of the book. In the epilogue (12:8-14), we again hear the words of the unnamed wise man who is commenting on the Teacher’s words to his son. We need to read the Teacher’s comments in the light of the evaluation of the second wise man in much the same way that we read the speeches of Job’s three friends in the light of the Yahweh speeches at the end of the book of Job. The epilogue affirms the fact that life under the sun is difficult; but then in the last two verses of the book, the wise man turns his son back to the foundational teachings of the faith: fear God, obey the commands, and expect a future judgment. Because of this structure, we need to differentiate the major themes in the speech of the Teacher from the major themes in the words of the second wise man who comments on the Teacher’s thinking.

Major Themes of the Teacher. One cannot read the Teacher’s comments in 1:12–12:7 without coming away with the impression that everything is “meaningless” (hebel [TH1892, ZH2039]). He looks for meaning in a number of different areas of life (work, pleasure, wisdom, wealth, relationships) and comes up empty. Half of the occurrences of the word hebel in the Old Testament are found in Ecclesiastes. It means literally “breath, breeze, vapor,” but the word is always used in a metaphorical way, signifying either the meaninglessness of a thing or its transitory nature. A minority of scholars think that the word has the latter sense and translate “everything is transitory,” giving the book of Ecclesiastes a radically different sense (see Fredericks 1993). But this is not the way the ancient versions (the LXX and Vulgate) understood it. Also the New Testament almost certainly contains an allusion to the hebel of Ecclesiastes in Romans 8:20, and there the sense is clearly “meaninglessness” or “frustration” (Gr. mataiotēs [TG3153, ZG3470]), rather than “temporary.”

Some scholars, while taking hebel in the sense of meaninglessness instead of transitory, argue for a more specific meaning. Fox (1989) takes it as “absurd,” Staples (1955) as “mysterious” and Ogden (1987:22) as “enigmatic,” but none of these arguments are persuasive. It is best to stick with the general translation of “meaninglessness” (for a fuller discussion see Longman 1998:61-64).

A second important theme for the Teacher is represented by the phrase “under the sun.” This phrase indicates the scope of the Teacher’s inquiry into meaning. It is analogous to saying “under heaven” (2:3; 3:1) or “on earth” (5:2). In other words, the Teacher is restricting his inquiry to what he can see and experience. He makes no appeal to revelation or to God for his knowledge.

The Teacher also reflects at length on death (3:16-22; 9:1-12; 12:1-7) and the inability to control or read the “times.” Death renders everything meaningless, since there is nothing after death. As for the inability to control or read the “times,” this is particularly frustrating for a wise man who needs to say the right thing and do the right thing at the right time. According to 3:1-15, God has established a right time for everything, but he has not let human beings in on it (see esp. 3:11). Death and the inability to control time are two factors that lead the Teacher to conclude that everything is meaningless.

The other major contributing factor to this conclusion is the Teacher’s conclusion that good people suffer, while bad people prosper. That is not the way it is supposed to be, but that is what he observes “under the sun” (see 7:15-18; 8:9-15).

Major Themes of the Second Wise Man. While the second wise man speaks much less than the Teacher (1:1-11; 12:8-14), his words are significant because they evaluate the significance of the Teacher’s words and provide the normative teaching of the book.

The most important themes of the second wise man and the book are found in 12:13-14, the last two verses of the book. Here the wise man tells his son (12:12) that the most important things in life are to “fear God and obey his commands.” It is true that the Teacher used the same words (3:14; 5:7; 7:18; 8:12) but with doubtful conviction. Here there is no doubt but that he intends his son to “fear God” in the sense of Proverbs 1:7—that is, to respect, honor, and worship the Lord. This attitude leads to a grateful obedience of God’s commandments. This attitude is also to be held in the light of the coming judgment of God.

THEOLOGICAL CONCERNS

The book of Ecclesiastes, though we cannot precisely date it, deals with issues that are perennially relevant, both during the entire period of the Old Testament as well as today. The Teacher expresses what we today would call a crisis of faith. Of course, as a person living in ancient Near Eastern society, he did not question God’s existence, but he did wonder about his fairness and also about the purpose of life. In a word, he struggled with life as he saw it “under the sun,” by which he meant “life from a human perspective.” From an “under the sun” perspective, our earthly life is all we have, which is why he expressed doubt, if not denial, about the idea of an afterlife (3:16-22; 9:3-7; 12:1-7). Furthermore, as he looks at life on earth, he sees it is unfair that the wicked often prosper, while the righteous suffer (7:15-18 and throughout). Is God fair if he does not reward the righteous in this life or the next? Accordingly, he concluded that all is “meaningless” (throughout, but see especially the summarizing statements in 1:2 and 12:8).

However, the Teacher’s perspective is not the final viewpoint of the book. We should understand his speech (1:12–12:7) as a lengthy quotation, which is framed by a second wise man speaking to his son (see “Author” above). It is the second wise man’s perspective on the Teacher that gives us the normative teaching of the book. In essence, he is using the Teacher’s speech as a tool in order to teach his son about the dangers of “under the sun” thinking (which is limited to human perception).

In the epilogue (see commentary on 12:8-14), the father tells his son that the Teacher is right if you restrict your vision to life “under the sun.” Life is hard, with only momentary glimpses of joy, and then you die (cf. the so-called “seize the day” passages: 2:24-26; 3:12-14, 22; 5:18-20; 8:15; 9:7-10). But to restrict one’s vision in this way is dangerous, and the father warns his son about dwelling too long on such viewpoints: “But, my child, let me give you some further advice: Be careful, for writing books is endless, and much study wears you out” (12:12). The intention of the book, then, can be summarized as a warning against speculative thinking that leads to the conclusion that everything is meaningless and an encouragement toward the “final conclusion: Fear God and obey his commands, for this is everyone’s duty. God will judge us for everything we do, including every secret thing, whether good or bad” (12:13-14).

Ecclesiastes and the New Testament Above, we have seen that the book of Ecclesiastes contains two voices; one is that of the Teacher, and the other is that of the unnamed wise man who is using the Teacher’s words to teach his son about the dangers of “under the sun” thinking. The Teacher has looked life on earth square in the face and has concluded, “Life is hard, and then you die.” The second wise man, in essence, agrees that this is true “under the sun,” but then at the very end points his son to what is truly important—fearing God by obeying his commandments in the light of the coming judgment (12:13-14).

The New Testament never quotes Ecclesiastes at length, but an allusion in Romans 8:20 is very important for us to see how we should understand the book in the light of the coming of Jesus Christ. In that verse, Paul reminds us that God had subjected the world to “God’s curse.” The Greek word Paul used (mataiotēs [TG3153, ZG3470]) is the same word used in the Septuagint to render the Hebrew for “meaningless” (hebel [TH1892, ZH2039]). Comfort’s (1993:322) comments on this are appropriate: “Nowhere in the NT is the kind of futility described in Ecclesiastes so clearly reflected as in Romans 8:20. When Paul speaks of the creation being subjected to futility, he is focusing on the inability of creation to attain the goal for which it was originally designed. When humanity sinned, God subjected creation to the curse of futility and decay (cf. Gen 3:17-19).”

In the context of the whole canon, we understand with new depth the fact that when the Teacher was talking about life under the sun, he was giving us insight into the effects of the Fall on all things in creation. In the broader context of Romans 8, Paul is telling us that God subjected the creation to the curse in hope of a future redemption. Hope is centered on Jesus; that is the message of the New Testament. Jesus subjected himself to the fallen world and experienced its meaninglessness in order to free us from the curse of the Fall (Gal 3:13). In particular, Jesus died in order to free us from the curse of death (1 Cor 15:20-28).

As we review the story of Jesus’ life as found in the Gospels and interpreted in the Epistles, we can see how this worked out. Jesus was God himself but did not hesitate to humble himself by taking on human form (Phil 2:5-11). When he was born, he was born not in grandeur but in a manger. He was the one through whom the creation came into being, but the world did not recognize him (John 1:10).

Toward the end of his life, we see how he was deserted by his broader group of followers and his closer circle of disciples, betrayed by Judas, and denied by Peter. Finally, as he was hanging on the cross, he cried out, “My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?” (Mark 15:34). At this point, Jesus experienced the meaninglessness of this world in a way that Qoheleth could not imagine. Jesus did this in order to break the curse of that meaninglessness in our life. His resurrection infuses life with new meaning. In short, Jesus, the Messiah, is the answer to the problem expressed by the Teacher’s cry, “meaningless, meaningless, everything is meaningless.”

OUTLINE

SUPERSCRIPTION (1:1)

I.   Frame Narrative: Prologue (1:2-11)

II.   The Teacher’s Autobiography (1:12–12:7)

A.   Introduction (1:12)

B.   The Teacher’s Search for the Meaning of Life (1:13–2:26)

1.   Beginning thoughts (1:13-18)

2.   Searching for meaning in pleasure (2:1-11)

3.   Searching for meaning in wisdom (2:12-17)

4.   Searching for meaning in work (2:18-23)

5.   Grab all the gusto you can! (2:24-26)

C.   The Search Continues (3:1–6:9)

1.   A time for everything (3:1-15)

2.   Where can we find justice? (3:16-22)

3.   I’d rather be dead (4:1-3)

4.   Searching for meaning in work, again (4:4-6)

5.   The lonely miser (4:7-8)

6.   It’s great to have friends (4:9-12)

7.   Even political power lets you down (4:13-16)

8.   God is distant (5:1-7)

9.   Oppression (5:8-9)

10.   Searching for meaning in money (5:10–6:9)

D.   The Teacher’s Advice (6:10–12:7)

1.   Who can know the future? (6:10-12)

2.   Advice (7:1-14)

3.   Wisdom and righteousness don’t help (7:15-22)

4.   Wisdom is hard to come by (7:23-24)

5.   Seeking and not finding (7:25-29)

6.   No one is like the wise! (8:1)

7.   The king is supreme (8:2-8)

8.   Do bad people really get what is coming to them? (8:9-15)

9.   Not even the wise know (8:16-17)

10.   Everyone dies! (9:1-10)

11.   Chance rules (9:11-12)

12.   The limits of wisdom (9:13-16)

13.   Assessing wisdom (9:17-18)

14.   Proverbs on wisdom and foolishness (10:1-4)

15.   The world upside down (10:5-7)

16.   The “accidents” of life (10:8-11)

17.   Fools (10:12-15)

18.   The king: blessing or curse? (10:16-17)

19.   More wisdom (10:18-19)

20.   Advice concerning the king (10:20)

21.   Risk and the uncertainty of life (11:1-6)

22.   Youth, old age, and death (11:7-10)

23.   Youth, old age, and death, continued (12:1-7)

III.   Frame Narrative: Epilogue (12:8-14)