Introduction
The biblical book of Ecclesiastes is my personal favorite. Twelve short chapters packed with an unbelievable amount of theology/ biblical philosophy. In my opinion, it’s the most succinct summation of biblical philosophy in the Bible. Also, in my opinion, I believe it serves as a “Cliff’s Notes” text for the book of Job. The commonalities between Ecclesiastes and Job are too numerous and too consistent for them to have been an accident. I can easily imagine Solomon reflecting on the book of Job as he’s putting his thoughts together for Ecclesiastes.
I believe there are three basic themes to be aware of as you read the book:
- juxtaposition
- paradox
- the circular reference
Juxtaposition: The act or an instance of placing two or more things side by side. Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary 11th ed.
Paradox: 1: a tenet contrary to received opinion 2 a: a statement that is seemingly contradictory or opposed to common sense but is perhaps true b: a self-contradictory statement that at first seems true c: an argument that apparently derives self-contradictory conclusions by valid deduction from acceptable premises. Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary 11th ed.
Circular Reference:
“I AM WHO I AM”
Exodus 3:14 (NKJV)
A circular reference is when you use the item being defined to describe the item being defined as God does in this case. When God explains who he is to Moses, he refers back to himself. There’s a line of thought I’ve come across which believes Moses was trying to learn God’s name in order to manipulate/ control him in accord with his Egyptian education/ upbringing. God tells Moses exactly who he is but doesn’t give him any information he can actually use. God lets Moses know he’s without beginning or end, which sums up who God is in his entirety. However, it’s also a riddle Moses can ponder the rest of his life (as can we) and never have enough knowledge to challenge God’s supremacy. Which is also, exactly the point.
The circular reference is especially important in the Bible as it shows the inherent link between the “Old” Testament and the “New”-the two cannot be separated. The “Old” Testament isn’t. It’s just as relevant today as it was several thousand years ago-in principle. That’s the key however-principle! Yes, some of the laws may no longer apply however, the principles they were meant to teach us do. Those principles are inherent to God’s character and thus, it’s impossible for them to lose relevance/ go “out of style”/ cease to apply. Anyone who says otherwise is a heretic at best and probably fully apostate.
6 Moreover He said, “I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.
Exodus 3:6 (NKJV
58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
John 8:58 (NKJV
In the two quotes above God and Jesus are essentially doing the same thing. They are in the “present” speaking about the past as if it is the present. In the Exodus example Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had already been dead about 300-400 years. God speaks about them as though they are still in the present, as if time has no relevance to him. It’s the same thing with Jesus except, he expands the time window. He’s speaking circa 30-33 AD. He refers to Abraham some 1,500 years or so prior (past tense) but then states, “I AM” (present tense). This mirroring of what God said has several implications: 1. Jesus and God are one and the same entity (which is why the religious leaders were so angry at this statement), 2. although time appears to be linear from our point of view, perhaps it is in fact circular in nature. I have no desire to go off on any metaphysical rabbit trails however, it’s something to consider.
This barely scratches the surface of what the book of Ecclesiastes has to offer. Let’s get started…