Ecclesiastes
Introduction
The title Ecclesiastes given to this book is the Greek translation of the Hebrew name Qoheleth meaning, perhaps, "one who convokes an assembly." The book, however, does not consist of public addresses, but is a treatise, more or less logically developed, on the vanity of all things. Reflections in prose and aphorisms in verse are intermingled in Ecclesiastes, which contains, besides, an introduction and an epilogue.
The book is concerned with the purpose and value of human life. While admitting the existence of a divine plan, it considers such a plan to be hidden from man, who seeks happiness without ever finding it here below (Eccl 3:11; 8:7, 17). Ecclesiastes applies his "Vanity of vanities" to everything "under the sun," even to that wisdom which seeks to find at last a semblance of good in the things of the world. Merit does not yield happiness for it is often tried by suffering. Riches and pleasures do not avail. Existence is monotonous, enjoyment fleeting and vain; darkness quickly follows. Life, then, is an enigma beyond human ability to solve.
While Ecclesiastes concedes that there is an advantage for man in the enjoyment of certain legitimate pleasures lest he lapse into pessimism and despair, he nevertheless considers this indulgence also vanity unless man returns due thanks to the Creator who has given him all. Under this aspect, earthly wisdom would rise to the higher level of true spiritual wisdom. This true wisdom is not found "under the sun" but is perceived only by the light of faith, inasmuch as it rests with God, who is the final Judge of the good and the bad, and whose reign endures forever. The Epilogue gives the clue to this thought (Eccl 12:13, 14).
The moral teaching of the book is imperfect, like the Old Testament itself (Hebrews 7:19), yet it marks an advance in the development of the doctrine of divine retribution. While rejecting the older solution of earthly rewards and punishments, Ecclesiastes looks forward to a more lasting one. The clear answer to the problem was to come with the light of Christ's teaching concerning future life.
The author of the book was a teacher of popular wisdom (Eccl
12:9). Qoheleth was obviously only his literary
name. Because he is called "David's son, king in
Ecclesiastes, Kohelet in Hebrew,
is a book of the Hebrew Bible. The title derives from the Greek
translation of the Hebrew title: קהלת
(variously transliterated as Qoheleth, Qohelethh, Kohelet,
Koheleth, or even Coheleth).
The
author represents himself as the son of David, and king over
Israel in Jerusalem
(1:1, 12, 16; 2:7, 9). The work consists of personal or autobiographic matter,
largely expressed in aphorisms and maxims illuminated in terse paragraphs with
reflections on the meaning of life and the best way of life. There is a long
excursus on death.
The Hebrew
קהלת is related to the root קהל
meaning "to gather." Thus the nominal form קהל
means "gathering, congregation." The Hebrew
קהלת is probably a title (rather than a name) referring
to one who gathers something. That something, given the context, is probably
either aphorisms
or a group of people for the purposes of instruction in wisdom.
The English
title of the book, Ecclesiastes, comes from the Septuagint
translation of Qoholet,
Εκκλησιαστής. It
has its origins in the Greek word
Εκκλησία (originally a secular
gathering, although later used primarily of religious gatherings, hence its New
Testament translation as church).
The
word Qoheleth has found several translations into English, including "the Preacher"
(translating Jerome's
ecclesiastes and Luther's der Prediger). Since preacher implies a
religious function, and the contents of the book do not reflect such a
function, this translation has largely been rejected by modern translations and
scholars. A better alternative is teacher, although this also fails to
capture the fundamental idea behind the Hebrew.
In the
two opening chapters the author describes himself as the son of David, and king
over Israel in Jerusalem, presenting himself as a philosopher at the center of
a brilliant court. This could apply only to king Solomon, for his
successors in Jerusalem were kings over Judah only. Consequently, the
traditional Rabbinic and early Christian view attributed Ecclesiastes to
king Solomon.
This view has been abandoned by many modern scholars, who now assume that
Qoheleth is a work in the pseudepigraphical tradition that borrowed weight for a
new work by putting it in the mouth of a well-known sage. The modern view is
that Ecclesiastes was written around 250 BCE by a
non-Hellenized
intellectual in the milieu of the Temple
in Jerusalem. The latest possible date for it is set by the fact that Ben Sirach
(written cca 180
BCE) repeatedly quotes or paraphrases it, as from a canonic rather than a
contemporary writing.
The
Hebrew of Ecclesiastes was not common in the era of Solomon’s reign, and the
book contains words borrowed from other languages. For example, the book
contains several Aramaic and Persian words. The influence of these two
languages is characteristic of late Hebrew, and is thought to have occurred
after Jerusalem was taken captive by Babylonian forces in 587 BCE. However, the
use of these languages could also be a reference by the author to the language
skills Solomon would have accumulated through his development of international
trade and industry, as well as from traveling dignitaries and other contacts
with the outside world (1 Kings 4:30, 34; 9:26-28; 10:1, 23, 24).
Dominic
Rudman, Determinism in the Book of Ecclesiastes (JSOTSup. 316;
Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001, p. 13) cites the modern commentaries
supporting this dating.
"Most current commentators e.g., R. N. Whybray, Ecclesiastes [NCB
Commentary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1989]
4-12) argue for a mid-tolate-third-century date. Others, among them N. Lohfink
(Kohelet [NEchtB; Wurzburg: Echter Verlag, 1980] 7) and C. E Whitley (Koheleth:
His Language and Thought [BZAW 148; Berlin/ New York: de Gruyter, 1979]
132-46), have suggested an
The
book of Ecclesiastes uses the expression haelohim, "the God",
32 times. Clarke’s Commentary, Volume III, page 799, states: The
book, entitled Koheleth, or Ecclesiastes, has ever been received, both by the
Jewish and Christian Church, as written under the inspiration of the Almighty;
and was held to be properly a part of the sacred canon.
Ecclesiastes
also appears in harmony with other Scriptures where they treat the same
subjects. It agrees with Genesis on man’s being made up of a body composed of
the dust of the ground and having the spirit (or life-force) from God
and the breath that sustains it (Ecclesiastes 3:20, 21; 12:7; Genesis 2:7;
7:22; Isaiah 42:5). Ecclesiastes also affirms the Bible teaching that man was
created perfect and upright but willfully chose to disobey God (Ecclesiastes
7:29; Genesis 1:31; 3:17; Deuteronomy 32:4, 5). Ecclesiastes also acknowledges
God as the Creator (Ecclesiastes 12:1; Genesis 1:1). Also, Ecclesiastes concurs
with the rest of the Hebrew Bible as to the state of the dead (Ecclesiastes
9:5, 10; Genesis 3:19; Psalms 6:5; 115:17).
Qoheleth's
stated aim is to find out how to ensure one benefits in life, an aim in accord
with the general purposes of Wisdom Literature. For Qoheleth, however, any
possible advantage in life is destroyed by the inevitability of death. As such,
Qoheleth concludes that life (and everything) is senseless. In light of this
conclusion, Qoheleth advises his audience to make the most of life, to seize
the day, for there is no way to secure favorable outcomes in the future.
Although this latter conclusion has sometimes been compared to Epicureanism,
for Qoheleth it comes about as the inevitable result of his failure to make
sense of existence.
This
conclusion is reflected in the refrain which both opens and closes Qoheleth's
words:
"Utterly senseless" says
Qoheleth, "Utterly senseless, everything is senseless!"
The
word translated senseless, הבל, literally means vapor,
breath. Qoheleth uses it metaphorically, and its precise meaning is
extensively debated. Older English translation often render it vanity,
but in modern usage this word has come to mean "self-pride" and lost
its Latinate connotation of emptiness and is thus no longer appropriate. Other
translations include meaningless, absurd, fleeting or senseless.
Some translations use the literal rendering vapor of vapors and so claim
to leave the interpretation to the reader.
I. Author. 1:1 Solomon appears to be the author of
the book. He
was the most
famous and powerful man in the world in his day. His
wisdom and
literary attainments were unequaled by any other.
II. Key Word. "Vanity" occurs some 37 times, and
the phrase
"under
the sun" some 28 times and refers to worldly life and wisdom.
III. Theme. The theme of Ecclesiastes is that all earthly
life is vanity
(empty,
futile). The experiences of Solomon
prove this. This book
is a
dramatic autobiography of his experiences and reflections as he
searched for
satisfaction in life.
Solomon could not find happiness
and meaning in a worldly
sensuous
life. Solomon saw earthly life at its
best, yet his soul was
never
satisfied. Solomon tried to find
satisfaction in the wisdom of
science
(1:4-11) and turning to a materialistic philosophy (
but it was
all empty. He turned to the pleasures of
building (2:4),
gardening
(2:5), cattle breeding (2:7), art collecting and music (2:8).
He sought satisfaction in fatalism
(3:1-15) and in the stoic's
philosophy (ch 4), ritualism and ceremony (ch
5) but these were all in
vain. He tired wealth (ch
6), and the enjoyment of a reputation (ch 7)
but he found
all these vain and futile.
There is no hope found in anything
this world offers. It is only
in the hope
of immortality which God gives us that we have real hope
(ASV
the term
"world.") Solomon's soul was
never satisfied though he had
everything
this world could offer one. Full
satisfaction can only be
found in
what God has for man. We are blessed
because Christ has
brought life
and immortality to light (2 Tim.
Careful Study Someone selecting a few verses from
this book
without
understanding the whole could be left with a wrong
impression. One must read the whole book and get
Solomon's grand
conclusion
in the last chapter to understand the message of
Ecclesiastes.
Solomon's conclusion is that life without
God is full of weariness
and
disappointment. The turning point in the
book is Eccl. 8:12 "Yet
surely I
know that it shall be well with them that fear God." The full
meaning of
the book is found in the last chapter-- "Fear God and keep
his
commandments for this is the whole duty of man." (
SONG OF SOLOMON
I.
Title and Author. This little
book of eight chapters has been title
many
ways. The Hebrew title is "the Song
of Songs," which means
the most
superlative song or as we would say, "the Best of Songs."
Verse 1 asserts that Solomon wrote
this song among the 1005 which
we wrote (I
Kings
II. The Content of the Song. The son is a poetic representation of
the
sentiment of lovers, some of it quite frank in intimate admiration
and desire
for each other. It is plain from the
spacing in the Hebrew
and the
change of person, number and gender of the personal
pronouns and
verb endings that the speakers shift from male to
female and
from the single male and female to a plurality of women
termed in the
text the "daughters of
description
or stage or drama directions.
The traditional view is that there
are two lovers, Solomon and a
woman of Shulam, a town seemingly in northern
chorus of
women from
harem).
III. Interpretation. There have been many different methods
employed to
discover the meaning and significance of the book.
1.
The Allegorical Interpretation.
The Jewish attempt to make
it an
allegory see the story as love of God for
to account
for the Song as the scripture to be read at the Passover
festival by
later Judaism.
A variant of this view held by
some early church fathers
thought the
song dealt with the Christ and His love for his bride the
church. This view has been widely accepted and
accounts for many
of the
interpretative chapter headings in many versions (e.g. ch.
1-3
"The Mutual
Love of Christ and His Church").
It is seen in the poetic
adoptions in
our songs as "Jesus, Rose of Sharon" and "the Lily of the
Valley." Oddly enough however, if the interpretations
were carried
through
correctly, the church, not Christ, would be represented by
these
titles.
J.W. McGarvey
said of this view: "I tried hard to see
something
prophetic in it, but I failed, and I have never yet
succeeded. I am not surprised, therefore, that all very
recent
interpreters
have abandoned the idea that the Shulamite in
some
way represented the church, and Solomon the Lord
Jesus. There is no sustained analogy in any part of
the song
to
anything connected with Christ or the church."
2.
The Dramatic View. A view that
originally the poem was a
drama in
which the settings and actions were supplied by pantomime
or stage
curtains. Some see the story as a love
play in which
Solomon's love for a young Jewish
country maiden is portrayed.
3.
The Collection View. Some think
the book is not a unit but
rather a
collection of wedding songs such as were used at wedding
festivals
and as are still used today in some middle eastern countries.
But the "Song of Solomon"
does seem to have a plot which develops
throughout
and it is not likely that a collection of isolated poems
would give a
story like this.
4. A Modernist View. One recent modernistic view (cf.
Interpreters'
Bible) has claimed the song was
borrowed from pagan religious rites.
This views proposes that the song was
taken over by
gradually
lost its identity with paganism. This
view has nothing but
conjecture
to support it.
5. A View of Pure Married Love. The Bible Commentary says "The
simplest and
most natural (interpretation) appears to be that which
regards it
as a poem of pure wedded love."
Edward J. Young says,
"And it reminds us, in
particularly beautiful fashion, how pure and
noble true
love is."
The Song of Solomon is a song about
the beauty and holiness of
married
love. In the context of Solomon's
political marriages, the
Shulamite
taught him the beauty of monogamous love.
The book has
some great
lessons for a time when we face the abuse of marriage and
the
perversion of sexuality in our time.
--- SERMON
Two Are Better Than One
Ecclesiastes
4:9-12
9 Two are better than one;
because
they have a good reward for their labour.
10 For if they fall, the one will lift up
his companion:
but woe
to him who is alone when he falls;
for he
has no one to help him up.
11 Again, if two lie down together, they
will keep warm:
but how
can one be warm alone?
12 Though one may be overpowered by
another,
two can
withstand him;
and a
threefold cord is not quickly broken.
(Ecclesiastes 4:9-12; The New King James Bible)
Introduction:
1.
Following a period of dissatisfaction with marriage there is now a
growing
trend of respect for the Biblical arrangement of marriage.
2.
Still far too many marriages are ending in divorce. There is evident
something
serious is happening between "here comes the bride" and
"here comes the judge."
3.
The strength and value of marriage can be seen in this passage.
"Two are better than one:
because they have a good reward for their
labour."
Why are two better than one?
1.
Support
1.
Two are better than one because you have someone to support you
and
someone you can support. V. 10.
2.
The importance of the home in this "dog eat
dog" age.
2.
Share
1.
Two can be better than one because we have someone to share
with. Verse 11 says, "Furthermore if two lie
down together they
keep
warm, but how can one be warm alone?" (NASV)
a. A basic purpose of marriage is
intimacy (Gen. 2:24).
2.
Do you recall the sharing of decisions in the beginning? How
wonderful
and helpful.
3.
Strengthen
1.
Two are better than one because there is strength in numbers. (cf.
Verse 12 "And
if one can overpower him who is alone, two can
resist
him." NASV).
2.
Marriage provides strength for facing the dilemmas of life.
3.
Marriage provides strength for avoiding the deception of life.
4.
Marriage provides strength for filling the demands of life.
Conclusion:
-- Windell Gann -- Walking Thru the Bible -- http://fly.hiwaay.net/~wgann/walk_ot/eccl-sos.htm