Challenging the Idols of the Twenty-First Century:

The Message of the Book of Ecclesiastes1

Tremper Longman III Robert H. Gundry Professor of Biblical Studies Westmont College longman @ westmont.edu Proper understanding of Ecclesiastes beins with the recognition that there are two voices in the book, the Teacher (1:12-12:7) and the frame narrator (1:1-11; 12:8-14). Theframenarrator examines and evaluates the thought of the Teacher to give his son (12:12) a lesson on life. The Teacher expresses an ccunder the sun" perspective. The frame narrator encourages his son toward an "above the sun" perspective. Finally, Ecclesiastes is read in the light of the New Testament.

Ecclesiastes is an enigmatic book. The Teacher repeatedly declares that life is "meaningless" (*?3, hebet). He emphasizes his sad conclusion by describing the pursuit of meaning as a "chasing after the wind" (1:14,17; 2:11,17,26; 4:4,6,16; 6:19). He concludes that there is "no profit" in life (1:3; 3:9; 5:11,16). The book is neglected by many Christians, including preachers, because it is so difficult to interpret. A book that grapples with the meaning of life, however, is on the surface of it one that has great relevance to the present generation that also struggles with finding purpose to existence. The potential relevance of this book makes the effort to understand it worthwhile. The following essay is an attempt to bring clarity to reading it, not only according to its "discrete witness" in the context of the OT,2 but also in its broader canonical meaning. Two VOICES Many readers miss the subtle, yet clear presence of two speakers in the book. The failure to differentiate the two voices can lead to a serious misunderstanding of Ecclesiastes and its message. One speaker speaks in the first person and goes by the name Qohelet, while the second speaker addresses Qohelet in the third person. The This article is adapted from an address presented originally for the SCJ Conference, April 17-18, 2009, at Cincinnati Christian University. B.S. Childs, Biblica Theology of the Oli and New Testaments: Theological Reflection on the Christian Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992) 95-118. Stone-Campbell Journal 12 (Fall, 2009) 207-216
2 1

SC] 12 (Fall, 2009): 207-216 shift of speakers is hard to follow unless the text is read closely (as it should be) since the second speaker does not have a name. I will refer to him as the second wise man or the frame narrator since his words are in the frame of the book. Qohelet's voice emerges in 1:12 in what is a formulaic introduction to an ancient autobiography ("I, Qohelet, have been king over Israel in Jerusalem")3 and continues to 12:7 where Qohelet concludes a poignant reflection on death. The frame narrator then is responsible for the prologue (1:2-11, after the superscription) and the epilogue (12:8-14). The presence of the frame narrator makes a brief appearance in 7:27 ("Qohelet said"), indicating that Qohelet's autobiographical speech is a long quote by the frame narrator. The epilogue also indicates that the frame narrator has an audience of one, his son, who in good wisdom literature fashion is the recipient of his father's instruction. Recognizing this literary dynamic leads to some initial interpretive conclusions that will shape how the book is approached. Qohelet's speech is a long quotation that is framed by a second speaker. Thus, Qohelet's theology is not necessarily the theology of the book. An analogy may be seen in the book of Job where there are also long speeches by a number of characters, Job, the three friends, and Elihu. The theology of Job, however, is not to be identified with the thought of these human characters, but in the Yahweh speeches at the end. In Ecclesiastes, the theology of the book is to be derived from the frame narrator as he evaluates Qohelet's message to his son in the epilogue. We, the readers, should identify with the son and listen to the teaching of his (our) father, the frame narrator. However, to do this well, we must come to a clear understanding of Qohelet's theology with which the father interacts.
T H E T H E O L O G Y OF Q O H E L E T

Qohelet expresses his theology in 1:12-12:7. His major point is easily summarized: "Life is hard and then you die." He searched for meaning in many places (work, pleasure, wisdom, wealth, status) and came up empty (*?2). Why> Qohelet comes back time and again to three reasons why life is so hard: death, injustice, and human inability to know the "right time." Death Qohelet believes that death is the end of the story. He lacks a firm belief in the afterlife. In 3:16-22, he sounds agnostic about it, concluding "Who knows whether the breath of humans goes up above and the breath of animals goes down to the depths of the earth?" (3:21). In 12:1-7, his final speech, he sounds even more pessimistic. Here Qohelet compares our aging bodies with a house and its inhabitants that are slowly falling apart.
3

See T. Longman, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1991).

208

Tremper Longman III: Challenging the Idols The scene is a bright sunny day that turns cloudy. He then describes the four groups that live in the house. Two are female and two male. One male (the landowners) and one female (the women who look through the window) are the owners, and one male (the house guards) and one female (the grinders) are the servants of the house. They languish like our bodies languish as they age. But this verse contains more than metaphors. It also contains allegorical thrusts. The "trembling" of the house guard and the "bending" of the landowners suggest the shaking and bending of our bodies in old age. The women grinders imply the teeth that "cease because they are few" and the dimming of the women looking through the window refer to loss of sight. Other parts of the description of the house and its environs may also point to the change that takes place in aging bodies. The closing of the doors to the street suggest the failure of bodily orifices. The budding almond tree well depicts the whitening of the hair. The failure of the caperberry (an ancient aphrodisiac) indicates that at a certain point not even supplements can help an old man's virility. Qohelet changes metaphors in 12:6 when he likens death to the destruction of precious objects. Life is like a silver thread, a golden bowl, a jar, but at death these are destroyed. In the final analysis, death brings about a reversal of the creation process when the dust and the spirit are divided (compare 12:7 with Gen 2:7). That death renders life meaningless can be illustrated by Qohelet's reasoning in 2:12-17. Here Qohelet attempts to find meaning in wisdom. Though promising (since "there was more profit to wisdom than folly," 2:13), in the light of the death that ends the life of both sage and fool, wisdom is ultimately meaningless. Injustice Qohelet, like Job and his three friends, believed that good people should live happy, carefree lives, while sinners should suffer and die young. If one takes certain passages out of context in Proverbs (for instance, 8:17-21), they might lead to a similar conclusion. As Qohelet observed life in 7:15, however, the results were dramatically different: Both I have observed in my meaningless life: There is a righteous person perishing in hisrighteousness,and there is a wicked person living long in his evil.4 In other words, Qohelet saw examples that directly contradicted the idea of a just world. This conclusion compels him to give some surprising advice in 7:16-18: Do not be too righteous and do not be overly wise. Why ruin yourself} Do not be too wicked and do not be a fool. Why die when it is not your time? It is good to hold on to this and also do not release your hand from that. The one who fears God will follow both of them. TranslationsfromEcclesiastes come from T. Longman III, Ecclesiastes (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998). 209
4

SCJ12 (Fall, 2009): 207-216 Qohelet encourages his listeners/readers to seek a middle way. If wisdom and righteousness do not benefit, why diligently pursue them? If wickedness and folly do not lead to disaster, why work hard to avoid them? In a passage like 8:10-14 Qohelet appears conflicted, at least at first glance. Thus, I observed the wicked buried and departed. They used to go out of the holy place, and they were praised in the city where they acted in such a way. This too is meaningless. Because the sentence for an evil deed is not quickly carried out, therefore the human heart isfilledwith evildoing. For sinners do evil a hundred times, and their days are lengthenedalthough I know it will be well for those who fear God because they fear him, and it will not be well for the wicked, and their days will not lengthen like a shadow, because they do not fear God. There is another example of meaningless that is done on the earth: There are righteous people who are treated as if they did wicked deeds, and wicked people who are treated as if they did righteous deeds. I say this too is meaningless. At first Qohelet points out the injustice that wicked people received respect not only during life but also after it. They received an honorable burial. He then moralizes on the fact that the wicked do not seem to get what they deserve by saying that such injustice only encourages wicked acts. All of a sudden, however, a shift occurs, when he surprisingly says that "he knows that it will be well for those who fear God . . . and it will not be well for the wicked." But before the end of the paragraph Qohelet is giving examples of inequity in the world. Some scholars detect a later editor at this point trying to inject a bit of "orthodox theology" into the context. This is a desperate move. The key to understanding Qohelet here is to pay attention to his use of the verbs "observe" (, m^ah) and "know" (JH% yada*). The former indicates his experience in the world and the latter his theology. He knows that the righteous should be rewarded and the wicked punished, but he sees the opposite. His theology conflicts with his experience, and since he ends with the latter, we can conclude that his experience trumps his theology. The "Right Time" Knowing the "right time" is critical to the wisdom enterprise. Proverbs makes it clear that the wise person knows the right time for action and for speech. A few examples include: It is a joy to a person to give an answer! How good a word at the right time! (15:23)5 Those who bless their neighbors with a loud voice in the early morning it will be considered a curse to them. (27:14)

5 Translations from Proverbs are from T. Longman, Proverbs (BCOTWP; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006).

210

Tremper Longman III: Challenging the Idols

The right application of the "contradictory" proverbs found in 26:4 and 26:5 depend on the wise person knowing the situation and applying one or the other at the "right time": Don't answer fools according to their stupidity; otherwise, you will become like them yourself. Answer fools according to their stupidity; otherwise, they will become wise in their own eyes. Qohelet himself makes it clear that he believes that God created the world in such a way that there is a right time, and he made humans so they are aware of this fact. The famous poem in 3:1-8 begins: "For everything there is a season, and a time for every activity under heaven." God made humans aware of this truth (3:11a: "he makes everything appropriate in its time. He also places eternity in their hearts"). While all this sounds comforting, Qohelet himself is deeply troubled by this. He believes, though God has made everything for a time, that human beings are unable to read the time (3:11b, "But still, no one can discover what God is doing from beginning to end"). This means that sages cannot do the right thing at the right time or say the right thing at the right time. In 9:12, the themes of death and not knowing the time come together in a way that reveals Qohelet's consternation: "Indeed, no one knows his time. Like fish that are entangled in an evil net and like birds caught in a snare, so people are ensnared in an evil time when it suddenly falls on them." The Search for Meaning Thus, these three factors (death, injustice, and the inability to read the time) render everything meaningless. Qohelet searches for meaning in pleasure (2:1-11); wisdom and folly (2:12-17); work (2:18-23; 4:4-6); political power (4:13-16), and wealth (5:10-6:9). His final conclusion is that these are all b2.6 In Qohelet's search for meaning, I believe we come to understand the connection between the book and Solomon. Beginning with the superscription (1:1), Qohelet is associated with Solomon. After all, he was the "son of David, king in Jerusalem." The significance of this association is that the historical Solomon had unprecedented wisdom, wealth, work, political power, and pleasure. If Solomon could not find "meaning" in these areas, then "what can anyone who comes after the king do but that which has already been done?" (2:12b). Most mortals wonder if the reason why they do not find satisfaction in money is because they do not have
That "meaninglessness" is his final conclusion is seen from the fact that the frame narrator begins both the prologue and the epilogue with the summary statement "Meaningless, meaningless," says Qohelet, "everything is meaningless" (1:2; 12:8). Attempts to understand *?2 as "transient" by those like D. Fredericks, Coping with Transience: Ecclesiastes on the Brevity of Life (Sheffield, UK: JSOT Press, 1993) are ill-founded. See Longman, Ecclesiastes, 61-65.
6

211

SCJ12 (Fall, 2009): 207-216 enough of it. The example of Solomon undermines that argument. Solomon had it all, and according to the book of Kings (1 Kings 11) ended his life with a broken relationship with God and a kingdom about to split in two. The indications are strong, however, that the author does not want us to identify Qohelet with Solomon. In the first place, if Qohelet were Solomon, why use the pseudonym? The pseudonym is part of the strategy of association since the verb (pp^ qahal "to assemble") from which the name Qohelet ("Assembler") derives is used in connection with Solomon a number of times in 1 Kings 8. In addition, after the first couple of chapters, the Solomonic fiction is dropped and Qohelet distances himself from the king (4:1-3; 5:8-9; 10:20).7 Carpe Diem Since life has no ultimate meaning or purpose, the best one can hope for in life are moments of pleasure. He communicates this part of his theology through what have been called carpe diem (Latin for "seize the day") passages, the first of which, in 2:24-26, states: There is nothing better for people than to eat and drink and enjoy their toil. This too, I see, isfromthe hand of God. For who will eat and who will worry apart from him? For he gives wisdom, knowledge, and pleasure to the one who pleases him, but he gives to the one who is offensive the task of gathering wealth to be given to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless and chasing the wind. (2:24-26) In the absence of meaning or purpose of life, Qohelet advocates grabbing whatever gusto one can from the little pleasures of life (see also 3:12-14; 3:22; 5:18-20; 8:15; 9:7-10). His statements must have been delivered with a tone of resignation, since there is really "nothing better" in life. The reason why Qohelet urges people to carpe diem is revealed in 5:18-20: Indeed, this is what I have observed to be good: that it is appropriate to eat, to drink, and to enjoy all the toil that one does under the sun the few days God has given to that person for that is his reward. Furthermore, everyone to whom God gives wealth and possessions and allows them to eat of it and to accept their reward and to take pleasure in their toilthis is God's gift. Indeed, they do not remember much about the days of their lives for God keeps them so busy with the pleasure of their heart. The final sentence indicates the advantage of carpe diem. To paraphrase, a glass of wine and a good meal presents the possibility that a person can be distracted from the harsh realities of life (that life is hard and then comes death) for a brief moment.
7 Those interested in more on authorship and the development of a Solomonic persona in Ecclesiastes may consult Longman, Ecclesiastes, 2-9.

212

Tremper Longman III: Challenging the Idols In other words, carpe diem is like a Novocain shot to the heart to help people cope with life.
T H E THEOLOGY OF T H E FRAME NARRATOR

( 1 : 2 - 1 1 ; 12:1-7)

Qohelet's words are framed by those of a second wise man who is speaking to his son (12:12). The prologue (1:2-11) serves the purpose of setting the stage for Qohelet's autobiography and thus reflects the mood and thought of Qohelet. The epilogue reveals the theology of the frame narrator as he describes and evaluates Qohelet's ideas. He begins by simply stating Qohelet's bottom line that everything is meaningless (12:8), and then he goes on to say in 12:9-12: Furthermore, Qohelet was a wise man. He also taught the people knowledge. He heard, investigated, and put in good order many proverbs. Qohelet sought tofindwords of delight and to write honestly words of truth. The words of the wise are like goads, and likefirmlyimplanted nails are the masters of collections. They are given by a shepherd. Furthermore, of these, my son, be warned! There is no end to the making of many books, and much study wearies the body. The frame narrator begins by complimenting Qohelet. He does not praise him but in essence by calling him a "wise man" and saying that "he heard, investigated, and put in good order many proverbs," he calls him a good technician. He comments that he "sought to find words of delight." One wonders in what way the frame narrator even imagines that Qohelet had the intention of writing words that might elicit or express delight! More relevant is his comment that Qohelet "wrote honestly words of truth." In what way, could the frame narrator have thought that "Life is hard and then one dies, so go out and grab whatever pleasurable distraction is available" is true? The answer to that question comes in understanding the parameters of Qohelet's thinking. Qohelet describes the world "under the sun" (1:14; 2:11,17,18), a phrase that is hard to pin down but must mean something like "apart from revelation." If this is correct, then the frame narrator informs his son that Qohelet was right, that if you restrict your purview to what is "under the sun," that is what one sees, thensadlyhis conclusions are true. The frame narrator wants to expose his son to Qohelet's theology to understand where "under the sun" thinking leads. It is a hard truth that hurts like a "goad" or "firmly implanted nails." It also explains why the frame narrator warns his son not to wear himself out by studying the endless books that are available to him. A modern analogy to the dynamics of the book of Ecclesiastes might be a parent who reads, say, the nihilist philosopher Nietzsche with their child and explores what is true but also points out the painful results of such a philosophy. In the end, though, Qohelet wants to do more than expose his son to "under the sun" thinking. He wants to lead him to an "above the sun" perspective. He does this in 12:13-14: 213

SCJ12 (Fall, 2009): 207-216 The end of the matter. All has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of humanity. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether good or evil. The two introductory phrases of this passage abruptly shift to a more positive theological teaching. The frame narrator essentially states that they have dwelt long enough on an "under the sun" perspective. He wants his son to know where Qohelet's thinking leads, but he certainly does not want his son to stay there. Thus, he urges his son to adopt the proper attitude toward God ("fear God"), to maintain that relationship ("keep his commandments"), and live in the light of the coming judgment ("God will bring every deed into judgment"). In short compass, the frame narrator has articulated the basics of OT theology. More than that, he points to the broader revelation that can give his son an "above the sun" perspective. "Fear God" is a keyword for wisdom, the commandments evoke the law, and the coming judgment makes one think of the prophets. Though brief, the frame narrator's positive theology is evocative of the basics and depths of the teaching of the Tanak.
ECCLESIASTES AS A N I D O L B U S T E R

In its OT canonical context, one of the chief functions of the book of Ecclesiastes is to serve the purpose of debunking idols. The message is that if one tries to make wealth, wisdom, pleasure, or anything more important than a relationship with God, then one makes that thing an idol, and idols do what they always do, they disappoint.
R E A D I N G ECCLESIASTES AS A CHRISTIAN

While some worry about reading the NT back into the OT, Jesus himself encouraged his disciples in the belief that the OT as a whole (Torah, Prophets, and Writings) anticipated his coming (Luke 24:25-27,44-49). While the disciples came to understand that the OT anticipated Christ in the light of the resurrection, Jesus' anger at their lack of understanding (24:25) indicates that they are not imposing a foreign meaning to the text when they do so. It is in the spirit of Luke 24 then that I ask the question, how should we read Ecclesiastes in the light of the NT? Or, how does Ecclesiastes anticipate Christ? I believe the response begins with Paul's words in Rom 8:18-218: I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons The passage continues until Rom 8:27, but my point can be made in reference to thefirstfour verses of the unit.
214
8

Tremper Longman III: Challenging the Idols of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. The connection of this passage to Ecclesiastes is marked in particular by the use of the word "frustration." The Greek word {matalotes) is the word used by the translators of the Septuagint to render the Hebrew word *? in the book of Ecclesiastes. Paul is pointing to the Fall (Genesis 3) as the moment when God subjected the world to "frustration" in response to human sin. At that point, the harmony of the relationship between God and his human creatures was lost as was the harmony among humans and also between humans and the rest of creation. However, the use of the word to describe the post-Fall world brings us to Ecclesiastes and the recognition that what Qohelet sees under the sun is a fallen world. Paul's awareness that the world is fallen does not lead him to the sad conclusions of Qohelet. Paul goes on to talk about liberation from bondage and the glorious freedom of the children of God. Paul knows that it is Jesus who already accomplished this redemption, and, though already accomplished, will be fully realized in the future. Indeed, the message of the gospel is that Jesus has accomplished this redemption from the "meaninglessness" of the fallen world, by subjecting himself to it, a point which Phil 2:6-11 powerfully expresses: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God. Jesus ministry, as described in the Gospels, incarnates his voluntary subjection to the ravages of the fallen world. John comments "He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him" (John 1:10-11).

215

SC] 12 (Fall, 2009): 207-216 Matthew and Luke narrate his lowly birth in the manger. Jesus' experience of the fallen world's "meaninglessness" (*?3, ) comes to a head, though, during the Passion Week. After entering Jerusalem to shouts of joy, the crowds soon desert him. Toward the end of the week, his disciples turn against him or abandon him. Judas betrays him and Peter denies him. But it is on the cross, when he cries out, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? (Mark 15:34), that Jesus experiences the *?3 of the fallen world like Qohelet could not even imagine. Jesus subjected himself to the fallen world in order to free us from its effects (Gal 3:13). Specifically, Jesus subjected himself to death in order to free us from its "victory," from its "sting" (1 Cor 15:55).
CONCLUSION: LIVING "ABOVE THE S U N "

How do Christians live in the light of the message of the book of Ecclesiastes? First, the book's original purpose remains relevant. John Calvin described the human mind as a "factory of idols." Christians struggle throughout life with idols. While we know that God should be our most ultimate concern, other things (work, pleasure, money, career, relationship) rise up and dislodge him from his rightful place in our lives. When that happens, Christians live "under the sun," and the book of Ecclesiastes is a reminder that these idols will let us down. The frame narrator points us back to an "above the sun" perspective on life.9 A NT reading of the book proclaims that God's response to the meaninglessness of the fallen world is Jesus' death and resurrection.sCj

9 This view does not advocate a contemptus mundi ("contempt of the world") approach as Jerome's influential understanding of the book suggests. He argued that the book advocated a withdrawal from the world to a monastic lifestyle. For a further development of an "above the sun" approach to life, see D. Allender and T. Longman III, Breaking the Idols of Tour Heart: How to Navigate the Temptations of Life (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2007).

216

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.