N. Eshelman
Puritan Board Senior
Did Solomon write the book of Ecclesiastes? If yes, why do you think so? If not, why not?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The author identifies himself as a King of Jerusalem and Son of David.
Did Solomon write the book of Ecclesiastes? If yes, why do you think so? If not, why not?
What, pray tell, do you think?
What, pray tell, do you think?
Michael, I think that Solomon would use SermonJams....
Seriously though, I do think that Solomon wrote the book. The first verse would be a lie not a literary device if it was not him. There is also 2.18; 12:9; and other texts that seem to point to Sol. Psalm 127, which belongs to Solomon looks a bit familiar in the light of Qohleth's book as well.
I am quite surprised by the number of conservative, reformed scholars that deny Solomon's writing it.
New sermon series on Ecclesiastes starts this Lord's Day. Here's an ad for the preaching.
Here's an ad for the preaching.
Great poster!
What, pray tell, do you think?
Michael, I think that Solomon would use SermonJams....
Seriously though, I do think that Solomon wrote the book. The first verse would be a lie not a literary device if it was not him. There is also 2.18; 12:9; and other texts that seem to point to Sol. Psalm 127, which belongs to Solomon looks a bit familiar in the light of Qohleth's book as well.What, pray tell, do you think?
I am quite surprised by the number of conservative, reformed scholars that deny Solomon's writing it.
New sermon series on Ecclesiastes starts this Lord's Day. Here's an ad for the preaching.
[/QUOTE]Here's an ad for the preaching.
Great poster!
Thanks! The congregation is placing these in coffee shops, laundromats, college campuses, gyms, grocery stores, etc. as a way to advertise. We are in something of a 'hipster' neighborhood so Ecclesiastes will minister to some of the nihilism of the community.
Son of David not much of an issue because Hezekiah is just as much a son and as a king of Jerusalem as Solomon. So the son of David can be anyone in that line of decent.
Also the term king of Jerusalem can also refer to a lesser lord in comparison to the Persian King of Kings, head monarch, after the exile.
What, pray tell, do you think?
Michael, I think that Solomon would use SermonJams....
Seriously though, I do think that Solomon wrote the book. The first verse would be a lie not a literary device if it was not him. There is also 2.18; 12:9; and other texts that seem to point to Sol. Psalm 127, which belongs to Solomon looks a bit familiar in the light of Qohleth's book as well.
I am quite surprised by the number of conservative, reformed scholars that deny Solomon's writing it.
New sermon series on Ecclesiastes starts this Lord's Day. Here's an ad for the preaching.
And if it were not Solomon, then the author would be saying he was wiser than Solomon. That is certainly more problematic than the word "all" which could include more than kings./.I voted that it does not matter.
I have wondered about this verse though.
(1:16) "I said in my heart, “I have acquired great wisdom, surpassing all who were over Jerusalem before me, and my heart has had great experience of wisdom and knowledge.”
"All who were over Jerusalem before me." If it was Solomon who wrote it, and he is talking about Israel's kings, than the only one over Jerusalem before him was David. It seems strange to use the word all.
Blessings,
Solomon authorship does not account for Persian and Aramaic vocabulary in the text, or even the noun pattern usage.
- all good points1. He says he's the son of David, the king.
2. That he is wiser than everyone else (perfect description of Solomon)
3. The things in the book perfectly describe the things Solomon did in his life (I'm assuming it was written right at the end of his life, where he could truly say that without God everything is vanity!
4. Its the traditional church position on the subject (or so I believe).
more than that, I often wonder what makes critics so sure a person can't use a different style at different times.Regarding the language issue: Is it possible that Solomon employed the aid of writers to help him write the book. Perhaps that accounts for the language discrepancies. I know people may think this sounds uneducated, but since none of us were there at the time, how do we know exactly what language a person would have used?
Yes. This is the same kind of argument against a traditional dating of Esther or Job, both of which have proven a tempest in a teapot.- all good points1. He says he's the son of David, the king.
2. That he is wiser than everyone else (perfect description of Solomon)
3. The things in the book perfectly describe the things Solomon did in his life (I'm assuming it was written right at the end of his life, where he could truly say that without God everything is vanity!
4. Its the traditional church position on the subject (or so I believe).
more than that, I often wonder what makes critics so sure a person can't use a different style at different times.Regarding the language issue: Is it possible that Solomon employed the aid of writers to help him write the book. Perhaps that accounts for the language discrepancies. I know people may think this sounds uneducated, but since none of us were there at the time, how do we know exactly what language a person would have used?
Language is so fluid apart from anything else. Has no-one else had the experience of reading a great deal of some particular author, or from a certain time in history....and then finding him/herself unconsciously imitating the style of writing? I do that all the time. Also if I pulled out an essay, say, that I wrote in my student days, I seriously doubt if it would be stylistically much like what I'm typing now
What, pray tell, do you think?
Michael, I think that Solomon would use SermonJams....
Seriously though, I do think that Solomon wrote the book. The first verse would be a lie not a literary device if it was not him. There is also 2.18; 12:9; and other texts that seem to point to Sol. Psalm 127, which belongs to Solomon looks a bit familiar in the light of Qohleth's book as well.
I am quite surprised by the number of conservative, reformed scholars that deny Solomon's writing it.
New sermon series on Ecclesiastes starts this Lord's Day. Here's an ad for the preaching.
I preach the odd chapter here and there. Last Sunday I preached Eccl 5 entitled 'Six Myths about life without God'
Those are:
Myth 1: Human beings are fair.
Myth 2: There is no need to worry about judgment from a higher authority.
Myth 3: Super status is available to human beings.
Myth 4: Wealth and success satisfies.
Myth 5: Increase gives ease and security.
Myth 6: There is meaning and purpose to life without God.
Got to love Ecclesiastes.
Also preached Ecclesiastes 3 (its on sermonaudio) under the title 'Whose time is it anyway?' .... geddit?
And if it were not Solomon, then the author would be saying he was wiser than Solomon. That is certainly more problematic than the word "all" which could include more than kings./.I voted that it does not matter.
I have wondered about this verse though.
(1:16) "I said in my heart, “I have acquired great wisdom, surpassing all who were over Jerusalem before me, and my heart has had great experience of wisdom and knowledge.”
"All who were over Jerusalem before me." If it was Solomon who wrote it, and he is talking about Israel's kings, than the only one over Jerusalem before him was David. It seems strange to use the word all.
Blessings,
and the Son of David.