Review: Jeremiah: Believers Church Bible Commentary

ETS Northeast Region Annual Meeting, 2014

A number of important books on Ecclesiastes have appeared in recent years, including works by Sneed, Barbour, Weeks, and Robinson. The first two of these began as doctoral dissertations (which usually means a fresh approach). Sneed contributes a thoroughly sociological interpretation of Ecclesiastes, following the theories of Max Weber. Sneed locates Qoheleth as one of the retainer class. He argues that Qoheleth used pessimism as a coping mechanism and survival strategy within the oppressive socio-historical context of Ptolemaic Judah. Barbour's approach is unique because she sees historical allusions in Ecclesiastes, although not in the obvious way that others have seen the presence of some historical situations. Her major contribution is the interpretation of Ecclesiastes 12:1-7 in terms of a city lament. The thesis of Weeks' book is that Ecclesiastes cannot properly be called skeptical. A more important contribution, however, is in his innovative interpretation of several passages, including the identification of rhetorical questions, which other interpreters had always taken as statements. Robinson has done a great service to Ecclesiastes scholarship in his translation and publication of Salmon ben Yeroham's medieval commentary of Ecclesiastes (written in Arabic, using Hebrew characters). The document was previously translated only into Hebrew (in an unpublished dissertation), and Robinson has also provided critical apparatus for most of the available manuscripts. My presentation will introduce and evaluate the new ideas in these four publications on Ecclesiastes. Bibliographical data: Mark R. Sneed, The Politics of Pessimism in Ecclesiastes: A Social-Science Perspective, Ancient Israel and its Literature. Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012. Reviewed by Stephen J. Bennett and Charles Awasu in Journal of Hebrew Scriptures 13 (2013). Available online at: http://jhsonline.org/reviews/reviews_new/review692.htm Jennie Barbour, The Story of Israel in the Book of Qohelet: Ecclesiastes as Cultural Memory, Oxford Theological Monographs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Reviewed by Stephen J. Bennett in Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 56/3 (2013) 603-605. Stuart Weeks, Ecclesiastes and Scepticism. LHBOTS 541. New York: T & T Clark International, 2012. Reviewed by Stephen J. Bennett in Vetus Testamentum 63/3 (2013) 510-512. Available online for subscribers at: http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/10.1163/15685330-12340011 James T. Robinson, Asceticism, Eschatology, Opposition to Philosophy: The Arabic Translation and Commentary of Salmon ben Yeroham on Qohelet (Ecclesiastes).Études sur le Judaïsme Médiéval, Tome XLV. Karaite Texts and Studies, Volume 5. Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2012. Reviewed by Stephen J. Bennett in Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 57/1 March, 2014 (anticipated).

Journal of Theological Interpretation, 2022

| This essay explores the question of the role and character of God in the book of Ecclesiastes. The essay identifies the places in Ecclesiastes (especially in Qoheleth's discourse) where God appears as a topic of discussion, attempts to classify these passages, and analyzes them in light of the whole. The essay also explores and evaluates the surprising absence of God in Qoheleth's discourse.

VEkklhsiastou/ ; /heb.,tl, h, ä qo in Ecc1:1) of the book. The Hebrew is the word Qohelet (also spelled Qoheleth, Kohelet, Koheleth) and it is usually referred to as Qohelet in scholarly articles. Qohelet can be used as a name or a title. As a title it seems to mean a ―caller of assemblies, ‖that is, one who calls the assembly together for teaching ―teacher,‖―speaker,‖ or ―Preacher, are all dynamic renderings. Although the word " Qoheleth " is understood as masculine, its form is Qal, feminine participle. Elsewhere the root qhl is always Hip˓il or Nip˓al (causative or reflexive/passive). Perhaps the feminine ending denotes the personification of wisdom.

E-21-BS

Personal I take it as my duty to include personal thoughts and reflections in this book, many of which will be included in this section. … Basically, I had a job and enjoyed good living conditions, which gave me much pleasure (5:18). I learned to profit from my labour and knew that this was a gift from God (5:19). I did not even meditate on the shortness of life, because God filled my heart with much joy (5:20). But still, evil was present (6:1a), something I had brought upon myself. I felt downcast, thinking that I was ‘standing’ spiritually, when actually I was not. I felt extremely burdened, having almost everything, but unable to use any of those possessions (6:2)! I had a wonderful calling, but could not walk in it; I had great gifts, but didn’t use them; I had a house, but it was as though I hadn’t; a good car, but it was stolen; energy, but without release; I had goods (not only materially), but I couldn’t use them either (6:3). Therefore, I felt very unhappy! Truly, sometimes I thought that a stillborn child had a better life than I had (6:3b-5). Yes, I did understand such situations. Together with Qoheleth, I was also crying: "all is vanity"! …

A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Ecclesiastes, 2020

There is a significant overlap, of course, between Schoors' 2013 commentary and his earlier works-in particular The Preacher I and II. The commentary became available only after I had finished a significant proportion of my own work, and I have retained existing references to these other studies, but noted places where the views expressed in his commentary differ.

Attending to ongoing debates about the "meaning of life" in Ecclesiastes, this article determines how Qoheleth addressed meaningfulness by drawing on a threefold scheme of definitions for life's meaning. These definitions are derived from psychological research and used to argue that all three conceptions appear within the book of Ecclesiastes. Qoheleth was primarily concerned with life's "coherence," which depends on predictable and reliable patterns in life that render it sensible, yet he also addressed life's "purpose" and "significance." While primarily determining how these three forms of meaning, along with their attendant ideas, are handled within Ecclesiastes itself, this article also demonstrates how resources from psychological research help to resolve debates among biblical interpreters, who agree far more than it at first appears once clearer definitions of "meaning" are employed.

This paper argues for the presence of three distinct voices in Ecclesiastes: Qfn, Qs, and Qp. Qfn is the Frame-Narrator. Speaking in the third person, he introduces and concludes the skeptic’s words and worldview via proverbial reflections. His trademark phrases are “vanity of vanities” and “says the Preacher.” Qs is the voice of Qoheleth taking on the persona of Solomon. Speaking in the first person, he is Qoheleth’s foil, the skeptic whose views will ultimately be defeated by Qp, the Preacher. If even Solomon, the richest and wisest man in ancient Israel, could find life meaningless, how much more would that be the case for the hoi polloi? Despite the futility of Solomon’s endeavors, Qp teaches his students to fear God, keep his commandments, and consider the works of God, because “God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil” (12:14).

Biblica, 2019

The enigmatic anecdote of the old and foolish king in Ecclesiastes 4,13-16 is a key text for identifying the specific context of Qohelet. This article argues that the anecdote is not merely proverbial and abstract, but reflects actual political events in the second half of the third century BCE. The old and foolish king, and the two youths who follow him, may be identified with specific figures from the Seleucid Kingdom. This identification is upheld by further clues in the rest of Qohelet’s discourse and provides us with a specific dating of Ecclesiastes in the 220s BCE. The context of the struggles between the Ptolemies and Seleucids demonstrates that the book of Ecclesiastes provides not just abstract philosophical wisdom but also pointed political commentary on developments in Judea during this time.