Sermon Tone Analysis

Background

From the earliest age, we are taught the value of education—not just “book smarts”, but “street smarts” also.

No matter how much we know, the greater value is in knowing how to apply and live out what we know.

Solomon certainly was wise, but even he discovered that living by wisdom alone was not enough.

What does having wisdom mean for us today?

Is it the same as it was to an ancient Jew?

Psalm

one who has insight The Hebrew verb used here, sakhal, can mean “to understand” or “to act wisely.”

Wisdom in the OT includes a religious or moral aspect since a wise person is characterized by righteousness and obedience (19:7; 37:30).

Let’s look at

What credence does Qoheleth give to the “advantage” of wisdom?

He ranks it over folly (cf.

), which is never a viable option for him.

Wisdom is contrasted with folly.

What else is wisdom associated with?

Compare ; ;

Wisdom is ground in knowing God’s Word

What about folly?

Look at

The biblical contrast of darkness and light is shared with wisdom and folly.

What are some other biblical contrasts that are important?

1; 3–14 The wise/foolish contrast is a stereotype in wisdom literature; for the association of wisdom with light, cf. ; , and of folly with darkness, cf. .

But it is clear that v 14b modifies the saying in v 14a about the superiority of wisdom.

Qoheleth is not to be described as “anti-wisdom,” but he is its severest critic; after all, he tried to attain wisdom, and he acknowledged failure in 7:23–24.

In Adam versus in Christ ()

Children of the devil () versus children of God ()

Sinners () versus Saints ()

This is the first example of the strong tensions that abound in the book (see above, pp.

lxiii–lxiv).

How is one to understand the train of thought of the author?

R. Gordis (and also D. Michel, Eigenart, 28–29) has recourse to the device of quotations: Qoheleth is quoting someone else’s view in vv 13–14a and then introduces an emphatic “but I know” in 14b, which contains his own view.

M. Fox is unwilling to recognize quotations without more evidence (cf.

ZAW 92 [1980] 416–31).

Fox emphasizes the polarity between light and darkness, and he argues that 2:13–14a “is a superlative affirmation of the advantage of wisdom over folly” (Qohelet, 183; cf.

113).

It is true that Qoheleth does not simply dismiss wisdom, but Fox seems to overstate the profit of wisdom, unless he wishes to claim that Qoheleth simply contradicts himself here.

It will be seen that vv 14–16 introduce the great equalizer: death.

1cor1:2

No inheritance () versus Heirs (; )

No inheritance () versus Heirs (; )

What do you take away from verses 16 and 17?

That the wise and the foolish have in common is that they are forgotten.

It is death itself, the great leveller, that he feels most deeply, as the question in v 16b indicates and as is also shown by v 17.

The context of v 17 indicates that he has particularly in mind the reality of death and lack of remembrance as part of the deed that is grievous for him.

The events of life do not make sense, so he loathes life.

Another thing that the wise and the foolish have in common is that they are forgotten.

There is an echo here of 1:11.

It is death itself, the great leveller, that he feels most deeply, as the question in v 16b indicates and as is also shown by v 17.

The context of v 17 indicates that he has particularly in mind the reality of death and lack of remembrance as part of the deed that is grievous for him.

The events of life do not make sense, so he loathes life.

What can we learn about Solomon from his words here?

מקרה, “lot,” is a favorite and key word (rendered in LXX by συνάντημα, “meeting,” not τύχη, “chance,” “fate”).

It designates what happens to a person.

The “happening” may refer to events in life for which there is no palpable explanation (9:1–3, 11–12), but particularly to one’s final lot or death, as here and 2:15, 3:19, and 9:2–3.

The import of the argument is that wisdom counts for nothing because both the fool and the wise have the same מקרה; they both have to die.

The superiority of wisdom therefore is seen to be quite theoretical.

The book of Ecclesiastes is a dark study on a life lived apart from God. Solomon looks back over his wasted years and finds no joy in them, only futility, vanity, and “a chasing after the wind” ().

Do you think he ever repented?

Look at

But he had learned his lesson—albeit the hard way—and he wraps up the book with this advice: “Now all has been heard; / here is the conclusion of the matter: / Fear God and keep his commandments, / for this is the duty of all mankind.

/ For God will bring every deed into judgment, / including every hidden thing, / whether it is good or evil” (.

This surely sounds like a man who has returned to the Lord and is trusting in Him.

15 Qoheleth applies his reasoning to himself and to the futility of his attempting to be wise.

The repetition of “I said to myself” is striking and suggests a certain emphasis.

16 Another thing that the wise and the foolish have in common is that they are forgotten.

There is an echo here of 1:11.

The lack of remembrance of things past includes humans as well.

This is another argument that relativizes the superiority of wisdom.

Even the hope of an immortality of name (see Prov 10:7) is rejected (Eccl 1:11; 9:5).

But one should not think that Qoheleth would have been satisfied with a remembrance that would never die.

It is death itself, the great leveller, that he feels most deeply, as the question in v 16b indicates and as is also shown by the outburst in v 17.

17 Qoheleth picks up on the words for action (מעשׂה, עשׂה) that occurred earlier.

In 1:13–14 he regarded all that happens under the heavens as vanity, as an evil (ענין רע) imposed by God.

A similar judgment was passed in 2:11 upon his own achievements.

The context of v 17 indicates that he has particularly in mind the reality of death and lack of remembrance as part of the מעשׂה, or deed, that is grievous for him.

The events of life do not make sense, so he loathes life.

As commentators have remarked, this is an unheard of statement in the context of OT wisdom, which always aimed at life (Prov 8:35; see R. E. Murphy, Int 20 [1966] 3–14).

All that happens will come to be explicitly termed the מעשׂה האלהים, God’s doing, which is beyond human ken (7:13; 8:17; 11:5; cf.

3:11).

Explanation

The sticking point for Qoheleth is death, inescapable and final.

In the rest of the Bible, the sting of death is somewhat assuaged by the thought that one lives on through one’s good name ()

but a virtuous name will never be blotted out.

Have regard for your name, since it will outlive you

longer than a thousand hoards of gold.

The days of a good life are numbered,

but a good name lasts forever.

(Sir 41:11–13, nrsv)

By the same token, the wicked are threatened with the loss of their name:

May his posterity be cut off;

may his name be blotted out in the second generation.

(Ps 109:13, nrsv)

For Qoheleth, however, an impenetrable curtain was drawn over the dead: there is no remembrance (Eccl 1:11; 2:16), and the inertia of Sheol remains (Eccl 9:10).

Job could welcome Sheol as a place of respite, of surcease from his sufferings (3:16–22; 10:20–22).

But Qoheleth’s attitude toward death is implacable—how can the wise die like the fools!

Let’s move to

How does relate to this section?

He used wisdom in investigating the world yet could not become wise.

He was a wise-man who did not have wisdom because he could not understand what God was doing in the world.