Canon comes from a Greek word mean rule as in a measuring stick or ruler. The idea is that a canon is a standard by which something is measured. In our usage canon refers to the collection of books that is considered authoritative. The question is how do we know Ecclesiastes is authoritative? The typical Christian answer to this question is a book is considered authoritative if it is inspired. Inspired means that the author of the book wrote the book under the mediation of the Holy Spirit. The concept of inspiration is based on 2 Timothy 3:16 where Paul says that, "All scripture is inspired by God." Of course this leads to the question how do we know what scripture is inspired by God? If it was that simple anyone could claim that they thought a particular piece of writing was inspired.
Generally the church has used three tests for inspiration of Old Testament writings: antiquity, attestation as scripture by the New Testament, and orthodoxy. In other words has the writing in question been traditionally considered scripture, does the New Testament cite or reference the work as scripture, and does the writing's teachings conform with the teachings of the faith? I will answer these questions for Ecclesiastes.
At various times there has been questions about whether or not Ecclesiastes is inspired because it is such a complex book. Christians have typically considered it canonical because Ecclesiastes was part of the Hebrew canon. However, we know the Jews debated the inclusion of Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs at the Council of Jamnia. The Council of Jamnia was a group of Jewish rabbis who met in 90 AD to reconstruct Judaism after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem and the devastation of the Roman conquest.
The rabbis decided both Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs "defiled the hands" which was a technical term meaning that both books were considered holy and required hand washing before handling. Only a small segment of the rabbis questioned the inclusion of the two books in the canon. In the end, the fact that there had to be a debate demonstrates that the two books were already included since the question was not whether to include them, but rather whether or not to exclude them.
The Dead Sea Scrolls were the authoritative documents of a community of Jews called the Qumran community. This collection of scrolls give us an indication of what books one sect of Jews considered authoritative as early as the 2nd century BC and as late as the 1st century BC. Among the scrolls have been found two fragments from the book of Ecclesiastes. The older one has been dated to 175-150 B.C. Here is a picture of the fragment recovered from this scroll.
However, we know that Ecclesiastes was considered holy scripture even before this. In the 3rd century BC, a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures was ordered by the King of Egypt, Ptolemy II, for inclusion in his library of Alexandria. This translation became known as the Septuagint which is a Greek word meaning 72 because 72 Jewish scholars worked on the translation. Ecclesiastes was included in the Septuagint which indicates it was considered holy scripture as early as the 3rd century BC.
Ecclesiastes seems to have been considered scriptural at least as far back as the 3rd century BC so it passes the antiquity test. Now we we ask, is Ecclesiastes considered scripture by the New Testament? The most direct quotation is James 4:13-14 where James says, "Come now, you who say, 'Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit' - yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes." In this passage, James not only refers to humanity's lack of control which is a prominent theme in Ecclesiastes, but also use the phrase "you are a mist." Mist is an acceptable translation for hebel. So it is likely James is alluding to Ecclesiastes.
Paul alludes to Ecclesiastes in chapter 8 where he talks about the creation being subject to futility. The futility of creation is a major theme of Ecclesiastes. In Romans 8:20 Paul uses the Greek word mataiotes which is the Greek word the Septuagint uses to translate hebel. This seems to indicate Paul has Ecclesiastes in mind when he writes Romans 8.
There are no explicit quotations of Ecclesiastes in the gospels. However, there are some possible allusions. The central question in Ecclesiastes is what profit is there in life? In Mark and Luke, Jesus asks, "For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?" While not a direct quotation it likely Jesus has Ecclesiastes in mind.
On the surface Ecclesiastes seems to fail the test of orthodoxy. Ecclesiastes is pessimistic and at times doubts if there is any goodness at all. In the course of our study, I think we will find that the differences between Ecclesiastes and the rest of the Old Testament is not as great as we think. Ecclesiastes is focused and blunt, but I think it is entirely consistent with the rest of the theology of the Old Testament. Many of our issues with Ecclesiastes are less with the theology of Ecclesiastes as with our own sanitized interpretation of scripture. If we read Ecclesiastes as wisdom literature and see it as a commentary on the effects of the fall, I think we will find it very much in line with the teaching of the rest of scripture.
Of course, the whole issue of what writings belong in the scripture and the history of canonization is not quite this neat. An extended discussion of these topics would be a very long blog post. Much ink has been spilled on this topic. My point is not to give an exhaustive treatment of the topic but to give some helpful big picture concepts.
Ecclesiastes seems to have been considered scriptural at least as far back as the 3rd century BC so it passes the antiquity test. Now we we ask, is Ecclesiastes considered scripture by the New Testament? The most direct quotation is James 4:13-14 where James says, "Come now, you who say, 'Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit' - yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes." In this passage, James not only refers to humanity's lack of control which is a prominent theme in Ecclesiastes, but also use the phrase "you are a mist." Mist is an acceptable translation for hebel. So it is likely James is alluding to Ecclesiastes.
Paul alludes to Ecclesiastes in chapter 8 where he talks about the creation being subject to futility. The futility of creation is a major theme of Ecclesiastes. In Romans 8:20 Paul uses the Greek word mataiotes which is the Greek word the Septuagint uses to translate hebel. This seems to indicate Paul has Ecclesiastes in mind when he writes Romans 8.
There are no explicit quotations of Ecclesiastes in the gospels. However, there are some possible allusions. The central question in Ecclesiastes is what profit is there in life? In Mark and Luke, Jesus asks, "For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?" While not a direct quotation it likely Jesus has Ecclesiastes in mind.
On the surface Ecclesiastes seems to fail the test of orthodoxy. Ecclesiastes is pessimistic and at times doubts if there is any goodness at all. In the course of our study, I think we will find that the differences between Ecclesiastes and the rest of the Old Testament is not as great as we think. Ecclesiastes is focused and blunt, but I think it is entirely consistent with the rest of the theology of the Old Testament. Many of our issues with Ecclesiastes are less with the theology of Ecclesiastes as with our own sanitized interpretation of scripture. If we read Ecclesiastes as wisdom literature and see it as a commentary on the effects of the fall, I think we will find it very much in line with the teaching of the rest of scripture.
Of course, the whole issue of what writings belong in the scripture and the history of canonization is not quite this neat. An extended discussion of these topics would be a very long blog post. Much ink has been spilled on this topic. My point is not to give an exhaustive treatment of the topic but to give some helpful big picture concepts.
No comments:
Post a Comment