Book Of Ecclesiastes Research Articles

Kapan Allah Membuat Segalanya Indah: Misteri Waktu dalam Kitab Pengkhotbah 3:11

“God makes each thing beautiful in its time.” This quote has somewhat found its common usage in social media. People have some habit of quoting this expression whenever they encounter difficulties so as to comfort themselves. Through these words, a person might hope earnestly that “God will help me or provide me with the ‘beautiful’ time someday.” But the question that immediately follows is “When?” What if the burden stays and life remains unchanged? Not many of the fans of these wise words know that the saying originates from the Book of Ecclesiastes (3:11), which in itself is a form of ancient Hebrew literature. In the complete verse of the Book, the clause “He hath made every thing beautiful in his time is followed by another clause, “also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.” The later part of the verse (3:11b) is often ignored. However, by accepting the words that “God hath set the world in their heart”, one realises that he or she cannot fathom God’s mind, but might make peace and accept that divine question. Hence, one might realise that both good times and the not-so-good times could be but “beautiful times” for oneself.

Aristotelian Theories in Abraham ibn Ezra's Commentaries to the Bible

Some of Abraham ibn Ezra’s philosophical ideas exposed in his biblical commentaries are the same as those of Aristotle. The purpose of this article is to analyse some of the Aristotelian ideas appearing in Abraham ibn Ezra’s biblical commentaries and explain how he adapts the Aristotelian concepts to the explanation of the specific biblical verses. Ibn Ezra uses these concepts in his explanation of the structure of the Universe as found in some Psalms, the creation of the world in Genesis 1, and the origin of evil according to the book of Ecclesiastes. This paper also attempts to provide a hypothesis on how Ibn Ezra was able to apprehend Aristotelian philosophy.

BIBLE MOTIVES AND IMAGES IN THE CREATIVITY OF T. Shavchenko and B. Lepkiy

BIBLE MOTIVES AND IMAGES IN THE CREATIVITY OF T. Shavchenko and B. Lepkiy

The use of <i>hebel</i> in Ecclesiastes: A political and economic reading

A hermeneutical cloud still dominates ongoing discourse on the meaning and application of הֶבֶל (hebel), a crucial weaving thread in the book of Ecclesiastes. The Hebrew Qoheleth, presumably the disguised author, proposes the theological ideology of hebel as the totality of human existence in this book. What does Qohelethintend to achieve by asserting and dismissing everything in human experience as hebel (vanity, meaningless, worthless, not beneficial, absurd and enigma)? This article proposes a political and economic reading of Ecclesiastes, holding that the author, from personal observation, saw and addressed life from the point of view of ivory tower aristocrats who sought to control their environment by every means to their benefit. It suggests that a political and economic reading of Ecclesiastes locates another perspective on Qoheleth’s purposes for the use of hebel. As such, it argues that the Qoheleth uses hebel as a literary rhetorical device as an evaluative grid to critique and indict the negative behaviour of the politically powerful and the wealthy, to caution against the reckless abuse of political and economic power to their benefit by those who live in privilege in society, and lastly to give counsel for an appropriate application of such privileged power for the good of society vis-à-vis the transitory, transient and unpredictable nature of human existence.

Ecclesiastes and Contemporary Argument

The book of Ecclesiastes is one of the least studied in the Bible. It should be more closely analysed for its critique of conventional, more ‘normative’ biblical books. Its relevance to contemporary thought has been unwittingly highlighted recently. Its argument against the normative view in the Bible mirrors arguments made in a recently published book by the British philosopher John Gray against the work of the Canadian psychologist and neuroscientist Steven Pinker. Ecclesiastes raises issues fundamental to contemporary discourse, such as whether we live in a world that progresses or whether the world is static and one where we are condemned to repeat the mistakes made by previous generations. This article demonstrates that current arguments, apparently deriving from Enlightenment thought, actually have origins going much further back. The author finally asks whether there really is nothing new under the sun. It is an article with a twist in the tail.

Ecclesiastes among the Megilloth: Death as the Interthematic Link

AbstractAmong the scrolls in the Megilloth, the book of Ecclesiastes seems out of place in terms of its motifs, themes, and literary features. Unlike the rest of the Megilloth, where good people receive happy endings and bad people deserve bad endings, death in Ecclesiastes renders everyone equal. Unlike the rest of the Megilloth where there is a sense of hope in the midst of death and even afterwards, death in Ecclesiastes is gloomy and hopeless. Unlike the rest of the Megilloth where memories are preserved through the survival of the community, Ecclesiastes asserts that death erases memory. Unlike the rest of the Megilloth, which comprises two historical narratives and two songs, Ecclesiastes belongs to the wisdom genre. This article argues that it is precisely this wisdom genre of the book of Ecclesiastes that forms an interthematic link with the larger Megilloth. One of the main themes in Ecclesiastes is death. This theme situates Ecclesiastes among the Megilloth and offers a counterperspective to the other scrolls contained within.

Kohelet: Der Prediger Salomo by Melanie Köhlmoos

Reviewed by: Kohelet: Der Prediger Salomo by Melanie Köhlmoos Annette Schellenberg melanie köhlmoos, Kohelet: Der Prediger Salomo (ATD 16; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015). Pp. 253. €44.99. The commentary on Ecclesiastes by Melanie Köhlmoos replaces the older work by Walther Zimmerli (1962) in the ATD series. K., who is professor of OT at the University of Frankfurt, offers a fresh and stimulating commentary, which reflects her research interests in literary theories (textual strategies, etc.) and intertextuality. [End Page 327] In five introductory chapters, K. lays out her views on the book of Ecclesiastes, addressing questions such as its place in the canon, reception history, genre and structure, the connection with Solomon, topics and theology, author and formation. Like most scholars, she considers it most likely that the bulk of Ecclesiastes originated in the middle of the third century b.c.e., but she also points out that this date remains hypothetical (p. 71). Regarding the author of the biblical book, K. argues that the "biographical" information in 12:9-10 might be as fictional as the Solomon fiction. Both serve to legitimate the author of the book, who uses the alias of Qoheleth and "hides" behind his mask of being Solomon. Nevertheless, the author still reveals a lot about himself, for example, through his language (Late Biblical Hebrew), the distance to the Torah, critical wisdom, and the "unmarked" intertextuality. In K.'s assessment, the work of Qoheleth was later expanded through redactional additions (p. 72). More concretely, she maintains that there is a layer of additions (1:2-11; 2:12*, 16; 3:9, 15; 9:5-6; 11:9*, 10; 12:1-12) that goes back to an editor Z (for Zweite Generation = "second generation"), who might have known Qoheleth, as well as several other additions (1:1; 3:17*, 18*, 21; 4:14-16; 5:12-16; 7:11-12, 23-29; 8:1, 10, 16-17; 9:11-12; 10:18-19; 11:9*; 12:13-14) that are not connected with each other but were added at different times. K. does not explain her redactional analysis in detail but points out that it is less based on assessments of content (and so-called contradictions) than on observations on language and style. Nonetheless, she also observes tendencies of the later additions, for example, that Z reinforces the "pessimistic" inclination of Qoheleth, enriches his argument with cosmological aspects, and argues against eschatological-protoapocalyptic traditions. Concentrating primarily on formal characteristics (mention of Qoheleth; passages in first person, second person, third person), K. analyzes the structure of Ecclesiastes as follows: 1:1; 1:2-11; 1:12–12:7; 12:8; 12:9-14, with 1:12–12:7 further divided into 1:12–4:16; 4:17–10:20; 11:1–12:7. She directs attention to the structuring phrases and elaborates on their implications for the book's genre. With "words of Qoheleth" (1:1; cf. 12:9-12) and the keyword "truth" (; 12:10), later redactors point out the book's status as an authoritative text. With Qoheleth's self-introduction as "king" (1:12) and the dominance of speeches in the first person, the book imitates the ancient Near Eastern tradition of royal testaments and has analogies in OT farewell speeches (e.g., Joshua 23; 24; Deuteronomy). And with the expression "says Qoheleth" (1:2; 12:8), finally, the framing passages present the book as narrated speech and the speaker (Qoheleth) as an authoritative person. Köhlmoos gives much weight to the implied identification of Qoheleth with King Solomon. She points out that this fiction is neither explicit nor complete; the book is not pseudepigraphic. Rather, "Solomon" is a mask of the author, meant to direct the reception of his work (p. 37). Though the fiction is most obvious in 1:12–2:26, K. concludes that it continues throughout the book. In her view, Qoheleth reuses the figure of Solomon to participate in the Solomonic discourse of his time, taking stands vis-à-vis the Solomon traditions of Kings, Chronicles, and Proverbs. In the actual commentary, K. offers, for each passage, a German translation with detailed notes, followed by a thorough analysis...

On an edition of ecclesiastical books catalogues between XVIth and XVIIth centuries. Reflections and research purposes

Some extant inventories and book-lists, produced between the end of the sixteenth century and the very beginning of the seventeenth century by Religious Orders, in order to comply with the regulations issued by the Sacra Congregatio de Indice ‒ aimed at dressing up a comprehensive catalogue of prohibited books ‒ are the main focus of at least three volumes recently released by the Vatican Library. Thus, a plenty of materials are now available, which enable us to scrutinize both purposes and goals of such an editorial enterprise. Text-critical criteria and philological methods, applied by the Authors throughout the aforementioned volumes, are here examined, with special regard to quantitative relevance of listed items.

Death and Divine Judgement in Ecclesiastes

The current scholarly consensus places Ecclesiastes’ composition in the postexilic era, sometime between the late Persian and early Hellenistic periods, leaning towards the late fourth or early third centuries BCE. Premised on this consensus, this thesis proposes that the book of Ecclesiastes is making a case for posthumous divine judgement in order to rectify pre-mortem injustices. Specifically, this thesis contends that issues relating to death and injustice raised by Qohelet in the book of Ecclesiastes point to the necessity of post-mortem divine judgement. Judging from its implied social and historical context, the book of Ecclesiastes also may have served as perhaps a provocative voice for, or as a catalyst to, the emergence of apocalyptic eschatology and later sectarian conflicts within Judaism during the mid-Second Temple period. Some people in postexilic Israelite society began to raise questions about traditional views of death, Sheol, and divine judgement at a time when retributive justice appears not to be assured or to be absent. One may well ask: what is the book of Ecclesiastes doing, if it appeared on the cusp of the Persian-Hellenistic transition period when the traditional idea of theodicy was perhaps becoming a serious issue in Israelite society, before full-blown apocalyptic eschatology surfaced? The answer seems to be inseparable from questions of how best Ecclesiastes as a book is to be read. Contemporary approaches to reading the book as a unified whole are examined, and a “frame-narrative” reading is argued to be the best approach. The key to unravelling the book’s puzzle lies in realizing that the author probably intended the frame-narrator to have the last say. The role of this “third person” is pivotal for explaining the paradoxes within Qohelet’s monologue and its relationship to the epilogue and uncovering the book’s overall purpose.

The Book of Ecclesiastes (Qohelet) and the Path to Joyous Living. T. A. Perry.

<i>The Book of Ecclesiastes (Qohelet) and the Path to Joyous Living</i>. T. A. Perry.

Data, autor e local do Livro de Eclesiastes

&lt;p&gt;O objetivo do presente artigo é fazer uma proposta sobre qual foi a data em que o livro bíblico do Eclesiastes קהלת) na sua forma hebraica) foi escrito, quem foi seu autor e o local em que foi escrito. Temas que sempre estiveram envoltos em acentuadas &lt;em&gt;discussões&lt;/em&gt; no mundo acadêmico relacionado com a pesquisa bíblica. Em cada um dos itens que nos propomos abordar, e as respectivas perguntas que pretendemos responder, começaremos revisando criticamente as propostas que tem sido feita pelos principais pesquisadores destes temas, em diferentes épocas e lugares. Para logo, a partir delas fazer uma proposta sobre os três temas que abordamos neste artigo: a data, o autor e o local do livro de Eclesiastes. Nossa conclusão é que a redação do livro de Qohélet aconteceu por volta do ano 250 a.C., sua autoria não pode ter sido de Salomão, mas de alguém que viveu no norte da palestina, na fronteira linguística com aramaico.&lt;/p&gt;

Qohelet and the Marks of Modernity: Reading Ecclesiastes with Matthew Arnold and Charles Taylor

The biblical book of Ecclesiastes is often claimed as a harbinger of modernity. In this essay, I compare Ecclesiastes with two overlapping constructions of modernity, taken from Matthew Arnold and Charles Taylor, focusing especially on Taylor’s motifs of inwardness, narrativity, meaninglessness, and ordinary life. I suggest that the likeness to modernity in Ecclesiastes is a complex bundle of emphases held in tension, which remains hospitable to pre-modern understandings and commitments.

Twentieth- and Twenty-first-century Readings of Hebel (הֶבֶל) in Ecclesiastes

The meaning of הֶבֶל is a crux interpretum for the book of Ecclesiastes. Notwithstanding some variation, Jerome’s vanitas reading of הֶבֶל in Ecclesiastes dominated scholarship for several centuries. Since the rise of modern biblical scholarship, הֶבֶל as ‘vanity’ has been largely rejected; however, little consensus has been reached regarding the word’s meaning. The result has been a rich history of interpretation as scholars develop various suggestions for how הֶבֶל should be understood in Ecclesiastes. This essay briefly sketches the history of interpretation of הֶבֶל, then surveys proposals for the meaning of הֶבֶל in Ecclesiastes during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

전도서의 대칭구조를 통한 문학구조의 통일성 연구

전도서의 대칭구조를 통한 문학구조의 통일성 연구

From Hebrew to Greek: Verbs in Translation in the Book of Ecclesiastes

Abstract This article discusses the translation of verbs in the Book of Ecclesiastes from Hebrew into Greek. Each Hebrew verbal category is examined in turn. Qal perfective verbs are found to be primarily rendered via the Greek aorist indicative, while Qal imperfective verbs are translated primarily by both the future indicative and by the aorist subjunctive. Qal participles are rendered almost equally by Greek participles and Greek finite forms (usually present), while Qal infinitives and imperatives are rendered by their equivalents in Greek. With regard to other Hebrew stems, these general trends hold true, but it is noted that Piel and Hiphil verbs are translated overwhelmingly by Greek active forms (almost never deponent or middle), while the Niphal is predictably rendered by passive Greek forms. Besides these general trends, the article makes note of exceptions and oddities which help to elucidate the ancient translator’s understanding of both the Hebrew and Greek verbal systems.

Vanity Karma: Ecclesiastes, the Bhagavad-Gītā, and the Meaning of Life—A Cross-Cultural Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes by Jayādvaita Swami

Vanity Karma: Ecclesiastes, the Bhagavad-Gītā, and the Meaning of Life—A Cross-Cultural Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes by Jayādvaita Swami

“Till Eyes and Tears Be the Same Things”

This article describes a Marvellian spirituality that remains generally continuous despite an evolving theological outlook. It contends that Marvell’s poetry dramatizes the persistence of Original Sin within vulnerable and impermanent green enclosures; thus, the subject must always return to an inexorable history and materiality in which spirituality is grounded. The article considers Marvell’s skepticism and unusual conception of eschatological time, these being informed by the Book of Ecclesiastes. For Marvell, meditation on history remains bound up not only with spirituality but also with sensory perception — in particular, with the optical and tactile senses of water. The article concludes with a comparative analysis, of Marvell’s “Eyes and Tears” and Richard Crashaw’s “The Weeper,” that redefines Marvell as a deliberately anti-metaphysical poet.

A comprehensive philosophical approach to Qohelet’s epistemology

An increasing number of studies have seen the light over the last few decades concerning the epistemology of the book of Ecclesiastes. The extant research seems to be limited to try to find a suitable philosophical profile for Qohelet’s concept of knowledge whilst ignoring a whole array of topics and theories in contemporary analytic epistemology. The available research thus reveals an ‘inside-out’ approach that is, reading Qohelet and then seeking to link his thought to a particular epistemological stance. In this study, however, an ‘outside-in’ approach is opted for that involves noting all the various issues in epistemology and then comparing each with what, if anything, Qohelet assumed in relation to the specific matter at hand.

The "Fear of God" in the Book of Ecclesiastes

Abstract The phrase "fear God" appears seven times in the book of Ecclesiastes 3:14; 5:7 [Heb., 5:6], 7:18; 8:12 [twice], 13; 12:3). The present study examines each use and determines that there are two different forces to the expression that are discerned by the context and that inform the theology of the two voices of the book. Qohelet, whose voice dominates the body of the book (1:12–12:7), encourages his listeners to be afraid of God and do their best to avoid drawing God's attention. After all, life is meaningless and God is no help. The frame narrator (1:1–11 and 12:8–14) encourages his son (12:12; and thus other readers) to combine the fear of God (understood as reverent awe) with obedience to the law.

2014 ABJS Earl McBride Lecture: Disruptive innovation: orthopaedics in the 21st century.

In the book of Ecclesiastes, Solomon wrote: “There is nothing new under the sun.” Despite Solomon’s proclamation, change seems to be the only constant in the practice of 21st century orthopaedics. Generally, our patients benefit from what some have termed “disruptive innovation”—innovation that disturbs the status quo, the usual manner of business, and/or assumptions that are subsequently disproven.