# Good suggestions on Ecclesiastes?



## nicnap (Jan 20, 2009)

I would love to have a solid commentary on Ecclesiastes...anyone know of any REALLY GOOD ones?

Thanks.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 20, 2009)

I found Kidner and Eaton to be good (if short) commentaries.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jan 20, 2009)

A excellent commentary is Ecclesiastes by Tremper Longman (NICOT series).


----------



## ADKing (Jan 21, 2009)

Charles Bridges is excellent--published by Banner of Truth. The other indispensable work is James Hamilton's The Royal Preacher. Although not a verse-by-verse commentary as much as a series of lectures (still pretty thorough) it was the most stimulating work theologically and devotionally I used when preaching through Ecclesiastes.


----------



## nicnap (Jan 21, 2009)

Thanks guys.


----------



## Guido's Brother (Jan 21, 2009)

I have found a lot of profit in H.C. Leupold's Exposition of Ecclesiastes.


----------



## Poimen (Jan 21, 2009)

I second the Eaton recommendation, especially his introduction to the book.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 21, 2009)

Nicholas,

Here is a link to the Hamilton work mentioned that I uploaded in PDF:

http://rapidshare.com/files/187245146/Royal_Preacher_Ecclesiastes_Hamilton.pdfHamilton Royal Preacher

There is also a good commentary by Reynolds.


----------



## nicnap (Jan 21, 2009)

Thanks for the link Fred. I appreciate it. 

Thanks to all.


----------



## greenbaggins (Jan 21, 2009)

Stephen L Smith said:


> A excellent commentary is Ecclesiastes by Tremper Longman (NICOT series).



I actually disagree with this assessment. I found this commentary to be among the very worst on Ecclesiastes, because of his view of the frame narrators. Basically, for Longman, the Preacher is a heretic, and almost no positive theology can be gleaned from the book at all except for the frame narrator. The same goes for his disciple in the Revised Expositor's Bible Commentary (written by a disciple of Longman). The very best technical commentary on Ecclesiastes is Choon Leong-Seow in the Anchor Bible. It is surprisingly helpful for a series that is usually liberal. Time after time, he had the best comments. For easier reads, I would go with Ferguson's book _The Pundit's Folly_, and also Kidner and Eaton, as Fred mentioned.


----------



## A5pointer (Jan 21, 2009)

greenbaggins said:


> Stephen L Smith said:
> 
> 
> > A excellent commentary is Ecclesiastes by Tremper Longman (NICOT series).
> ...



I found Longman's thesis the best way to make sense of some of the bizzare(unorthodox) wisdom of the preacher. I found his argument for internal evidences against full Solomenic authorship compelling. How do you suggest we take said wisdom otherwise? It is hard for me to buy the confused backsliden theory. What is it about the frame theory that causes you to reject it? Thanks


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 21, 2009)

I'm with Lane here. (But then again, I'm not a big Longman fan in general). Kidner and Eaton do a very good job of explaining the correct take on the book - which I view as a missions oriented book. It is Solomon's way of explaining all the things he tried with no satisfaction.

I preached an entire series through the book, and found no difficulty at all with it. 

Christ Church PCA Ecclesiastes Sermons

I cannot understand why anyone would think that the Lord would include a heretic's book in Scripture.


----------



## A5pointer (Jan 21, 2009)

fredtgreco said:


> I'm with Lane here. (But then again, I'm not a big Longman fan in general). Kidner and Eaton do a very good job of explaining the correct take on the book - which I view as a missions oriented book. It is Solomon's way of explaining all the things he tried with no satisfaction.
> 
> I preached an entire series through the book, and found no difficulty at all with it.
> 
> ...



Frederick thank you. Having preached the whole book you are much more familiar with it than I am. You know that the preacher makes some pretty bizzare statements and seemingly opposite flip flop statements that have nothing to do with things and their satisfaction. How did you harmonize these segments with orthodox theology and wisdom of YHVH and His people? And to answer your last question, if Longman is correct the heretical book is bracketed by an inspired author to be shown as such, heresy. This could certainly be used to instruct the people of God. Did you read Longman's take on it? Thank you for your input on it.


----------



## toddpedlar (Jan 21, 2009)

Pundit's Folly is a really nice exposition packaged in a wonderful way. Ferguson really swayed me to a position that Ecclesiastes does have good evangelistic function. 

I'm also with Fred on the Longman thesis - it's really disturbing when otherwise solid folks take the liberal's position on a book of Holy writ. Why one needs to posit non-Solomonic authorship in the first place is a mystery to me - it's very easy to hear the whole book as Solomon's reflections on this life and hope for the next; not hard at all to imagine the man speaking those words to me as my elder brother helping me gain better perspective on the world and God's sovereign rule over it. 

Don't miss Edward Reynolds's exposition, either, in volume 4 of his works. It together with Bridges served to gird up my own teaching of Ecclesiastes in our sunday school this fall.


----------



## A5pointer (Jan 21, 2009)

toddpedlar said:


> Pundit's Folly is a really nice exposition packaged in a wonderful way. Ferguson really swayed me to a position that Ecclesiastes does have good evangelistic function.
> 
> I'm also with Fred on the Longman thesis - it's really disturbing when otherwise solid folks take the liberal's position on a book of Holy writ. - it's very easy to hear the whole book as Solomon's reflections on this life and hope for the next; not hard at all to imagine the man speaking those words to me as my elder brother helping me gain better perspective on the world and God's sovereign rule over it.
> 
> Don't miss Edward Reynolds's exposition, either, in volume 4 of his works. It together with Bridges served to gird up my own teaching of Ecclesiastes in our sunday school this fall.



Thank you Todd. This need not be a mystery. Longman points out statements made by the preacher that seem out of place to be made by Solomon King of Israel. One I remember is where he laments injustice in the land. As king of Israel he would have total control of injustice if he chose to. There are others. Have you read Longmans take? Any more thoughts on why it must be wrong?


----------



## nicnap (Jan 21, 2009)

I actually take it from Fred's stance. My view is that the preacher is looking at "life under the sun" as if life were without God (vanity)- he brings it around when he says to remember your Creator in ch.12. 
The pursuit of wisdom without revelation from the God of the Bible is vanity, thus Parmenides, Heraclitus, Plato... If there is no God, then all of Life "under the sun" is vanity, and we should conclude with Camus that the only question is suicide.


The pursuit of happiness without revelation from the God of the Bible is vanity, and empty pleasure leads to more vanity...etc.

And so is my take on Ecclesiastes, all the way through until the preacher brings his sermon home and applies it in 12.

So...that is why I am looking for good commentaries. I have seen a couple REALLY BAD ones, and am wanting the opposite.

Blessings.


----------



## Berit (Jan 21, 2009)

Hi Bruce,
Here is a link to a critique of Longman

V13N3A3


----------



## moral necessity (Jan 21, 2009)

luther on ecclesiastes - Christianbook.com Search

By far the best commentary I have ever read on this section of Scripture! I think he's spot on, especially with regard to context! Worth every penny!


----------



## Logopneumatika (Jan 21, 2009)

Though not a commentary per se, Peter Leithart's _Solomon Among the Postmoderns_ may prove helpful to some of the philosophical bricolage of the Preacher.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Jan 21, 2009)

As you can already tell there are almost as many views on Ecclesiastes as there are commentaries.

A preacher I very much respect did a GREAT series on Ecclesiastes...here is his bibliography he shared with the congregation.

*A Bibliography on Qoheleth

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly*



Many of you have asked about helpful resources on Qoheleth. This is tricky because the larger issues of theme, structure, theology and intent all radically impact the way that an interpreter deals with individual texts. The following is my own annotated bibliography.



*The Good (the helpful)*

Reflecting with Solomon, Selected Studies on the Book of Ecclesiastes, edited by Roy Zuck (Baker Bookhouse). This is by far the most helpful volume on Qoheleth. A number of the essays are priceless, especially chs. 1, 4, 5, 9, 15. (Ch 5 by Ardel Canedy is excellent, and most helpful).



Five Festal Garments, Christian Reflections on The Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes and Esther by Barry Webb (IVP). Webb's chapter on Ecc is very, very helpful.



Expositor's Bible Commentary Vol. 5, "Ecclesiastes," by J. Stafford Wright (Zondervan). This is helpful commentary, set within a fairly good interpretative structure. 



The New American Commentary, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs by Duane Garrett (Broadman). Garrett is also helpful and set within a fairly good interpretative structure. 



Koheleth- The Man and His World by Robert Gordis (Shocken). Gordis is a Jewish scholar and although this commentary is based on the Hebrew text and has some interpretive flaws, some of comments, especially in the intro, are very insightful.



Joy at the End of the Tether by Doug Wilson (Canon Press). Although this is not a technical commentary, or even really a textual commentary, Wilson's approach is similar to mine. It is a good read, even when you disagree.



A Table in the Mist, Ecclesiastes Through New Eyes by Jeffery Meyers (Athanasius Press). Very good, similar to my understanding of Ecc.



*The bad (not really bad, but not nearly as helpful)*

The Message of Ecclesiastes by Derek Kidner (IVP). Kidner is a wonderful OT scholar, whom I enjoy frequently. However, in his exposition of Ecc he takes one of the various antithesis approaches: the Solomon figure is having a dialogue/debate with himself between secularism and faith. Kidner does have some helpful comments, but his interpretative structure takes a lot of the bite out of Qoheleth.



Charles Bridges' (Geneva Bible Commentary) and Michael Eaton (Tyndale Old Testament Commentary) take an antithesis or dialectical view, in that the writer is presenting life without God, apart from faith, etc.



Sinclair Ferguson, The Pundit's Folly (Banner of Truth) fits or floats between Kidner and the latter two.



*The Ugly (the truly worthless)*

Tremper Longman's The Book of Ecclesiastes, NICOT (Eerdmans) is terrible. He thinks Qoheleth was an unorthodox, skeptical sage, and the book was redeemed by the frame narrator who added the last few orthodox verses.

Breaking the Idols of Your Heart by Longman and Allendar is a popularization of Longman's view through story. See my review of this book in Southern Baptist Theological Journal, Spring 08, 116-118.



Leupold, Exposition of Ecclesiastes (Baker), Hengstenberg, Ecclesiastes (Sovereign Grace) and Delitzsch, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon (Eerdmans) all have a very negative views of Qoheleth, and thus their commentaries have very little value.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 21, 2009)

I'm going to (respctfully) disagree with the last two posts. I would not spend a dime on anything Leithart wrote. I also would not consider Wilson or Myers go to guys for a commentary. I'd likely reverse the "good" and the "The bad (not really bad, but not nearly as helpful" categories.


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jan 21, 2009)

greenbaggins said:


> Stephen L Smith said:
> 
> 
> > A excellent commentary is Ecclesiastes by Tremper Longman (NICOT series).
> ...



I have noted there is little agreement on this thread on a good commentary and I suspect this reflects the confusing nature of Ecclesiastes. I stand by my defence of Longman's commentary. Longman's work is highly rated by many Reformed ministries (eg More College, Sydney; John Piper; Westminster Seminary etc). I always look at the broader endorsement when considering a good commentary. Longman points out that Qohelet does not refer to God using His covenantal name and this is one of many reflections of the troubling theology of Qohelet. Longman rightly points out the book is a reflection of Rom 8:18-21. It is worth reading the 4 theology chapters (in the introduction) carefully. I myself do not agree with all his commentary but still consider it a fine commentary.


----------



## CharlieJ (Jan 21, 2009)

Nick, Dr. Shaw specifically mentioned (on the OTI DVD) Longman's commentary as an extremely poor one. If you talk with him, I believe he has some recommendations. I used to lean toward the dual authorship theory, but now I realize that it creates as many or more problems than it proposes to solve.


----------



## greenbaggins (Jan 22, 2009)

A5pointer said:


> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> > Stephen L Smith said:
> ...



Because the frame narrator says explicitly "This man was wise" (Ecc. 12:9). What is usually missed by proponents of Longman's thesis (not to mention the reason why so much of Ecclesiastes is difficult) is that the Preacher is trying a thought experiment of what life looks like without God (this is the meaning of the phrase "under the sun"). The narrator's final comment also points in this direction: you have to include God in the picture (vv. 13-14 of ch. 12). Therefore, I utterly reject Longman's thesis. An additional point is required here: the issue of how Solomon is involved is a completely distinct question from whether Longman's thesis is correct or not.


----------



## matthew11v25 (Jan 22, 2009)

Is the presence of a Frame-Narrator in Ecclesiastes commonly accepted? 

Fred, I should have clarified that I vouch for the series that the pastor preached not necessarily the listed resources since I have only interacted with a few on the list.


----------



## fredtgreco (Jan 22, 2009)

Matthew,

I understand completely. I was not trying to be critical of you, but rather to cast a warning before others potentially reading this thread.


----------



## caddy (Jan 22, 2009)

Ah, Ecclesiastes, the most marked up book in my Bible!

I agree with the Ferguson, Hamilton, Kidner Recommendations. Consider also the ACCS ( Ancient Christian Commentary Series ). Another recommendation, unusual though it may be is Robert L. Shorts Book entitled A Time to be Born A Time to Die. It's a wonderful book ( 1973 ) of Ecclesiastes in Pictures. There is much good commentary to be found in the back as well. There just happens to be a copy of it on sale on Ebay. I would definately snag it. It is thought provoking and worth the purchase In my humble opinion!

A Time to Be Born--A Time to Die by Robert L. Short ... - eBay (item 200298950839 end time Feb-13-09 12:00:39 PST)


----------



## Stephen L Smith (Jan 22, 2009)

Ligonier Ministries has a list of commentaries worth checking out Top 5 Commentaries on the Book of Ecclesiastes | Ligonier Ministries. Putting Longman in the 'Top 5' to my mind is a balanced assessment. The others listed are also ones positively discussed on this board.


----------

