Editing Ecclesiastes (section)

==Composition==

===Title, date and author===
[[File:087.King Solomon in Old Age.jpg|alt="King Solomon in Old Age" by Gustave Doré|thumb|''[[Solomon|King Solomon]] in Old Age'' by [[Gustave Doré]] (1866), a depiction of the purported author of Ecclesiastes, according to rabbinic tradition]]

The book takes its name from the Greek {{transliteration|grc|ekklēsiastēs}}, a translation of the title by which the central figure refers to himself: "Kohelet", meaning something like "one who convenes or addresses an assembly".{{sfn|Gilbert|2009|pp=124–25}} According to rabbinic tradition, Ecclesiastes was written by [[Solomon|King Solomon]] in his old age{{sfn|Brown|2011|p=11}} (an alternative tradition that "[[Hezekiah]] and his colleagues wrote [[Isaiah]], [[Book of Proverbs|Proverbs]], the [[Song of Songs]] and Ecclesiastes" probably means simply that the book was edited under Hezekiah),{{sfn|Smith|2007|p=692}} but critical scholars have long rejected the idea of a [[pre-exilic]] origin.{{sfn|Fox|2004|p=x}}{{sfn|Bartholomew|2009|pp=50–52}} According to Christian tradition, the book was probably written by another Solomon ([[Gregory of Nyssa]] wrote that it was written by another Solomon;{{sfn|Wright|2014|p=287}} [[Didymus the Blind]] wrote that it was probably written by several authors{{sfn|Wright|2014|p=192}}). The presence of [[Old Persian|Persian]] loanwords and numerous [[Imperial Aramaic|Aramaisms]] points to a date no earlier than about 450 BCE,{{sfn|Seow|2007|p=944}} while the latest possible date for its composition is 180 BCE, when the Jewish writer [[Ben Sira]] quotes from it.{{sfn|Fox|2004|p=xiv}} The dispute as to whether Ecclesiastes belongs to the [[Achaemenid Empire|Persian]] or the [[Hellenistic period|Hellenistic]] periods (i.e., the earlier or later part of this period) revolves around the degree of [[Hellenization]] (influence of Greek culture and thought) present in the book. Scholars arguing for a Persian date ({{circa|450–330 BCE}}) hold that there is a complete lack of Greek influence;{{sfn|Seow|2007|p=944}} those who argue for a Hellenistic date ({{circa|330–180 BCE}}) argue that it shows internal evidence of Greek thought and social setting.{{sfn|Bartholomew|2009|pp=54–55}}

Also unresolved is whether the author and narrator of Kohelet are identical. Ecclesiastes regularly switches between third-person quotations of Kohelet and first-person reflections on Kohelet's words, which would indicate the book was written as a commentary on Kohelet's parables rather than a personally-authored repository of his sayings. Some scholars have argued that the third-person narrative structure is an artificial literary device along the lines of [[Uncle Remus]], although the description of the Kohelet in 12:8–14 seems to favour a historical person whose thoughts are presented by the narrator.{{sfn|Bartholomew|2009|p=48}} It has been argued, however, that the question has no theological importance;{{Sfn|Bartholomew|2009|p=48}} one scholar (Roland Murphy) has commented that Kohelet himself would have regarded the time and ingenuity put into interpreting his book as "one more example of the [[fatalism|futility of human effort]]".{{sfn|Ingram|2006|p=45}}

===Genre and setting===
Ecclesiastes has taken its literary form from the Middle Eastern tradition of the fictional autobiography, in which a character, often a king, relates his experiences and draws lessons from them, often self-critical: Kohelet likewise identifies himself as a king, speaks of his search for wisdom, relates his conclusions, and recognises his limitations.{{sfn|Fox|2004|p=xiii}} The book belongs to the category of [[wisdom literature]], the body of biblical writings which give advice on life, together with reflections on its problems and meanings—other examples include the [[Book of Job]], [[Book of Proverbs|Proverbs]], and some of the [[Book of Psalms|Psalms]]. Ecclesiastes differs from the other biblical Wisdom books in being deeply skeptical of the usefulness of wisdom itself.{{sfn|Brettler|2007|p=721}} Ecclesiastes in turn influenced the [[deuterocanonical]] works, [[Wisdom of Solomon]] and [[Sirach]], both of which contain vocal rejections of the Ecclesiastical philosophy of futility.

Wisdom was a popular genre in the ancient world, where it was cultivated in scribal circles and directed towards young men who would take up careers in high officialdom and royal courts; there is strong evidence that some of these books, or at least sayings and teachings, were translated into Hebrew and influenced the Book of Proverbs, and the author of Ecclesiastes was probably familiar with examples from Egypt and Mesopotamia.{{sfn|Fox|2004|pp=x–xi}} He may also have been influenced by Greek philosophy, specifically the schools of [[Stoicism]], which held that all things are fated, and [[Epicureanism]], which held that happiness was best pursued through the quiet cultivation of life's simpler pleasures.{{sfn|Gilbert|2009|p=125}}

===Canonicity===
Though many earlier theologians, including Augustine and John Calvin, raised no concerns regarding Ecclesiastes' position or consistency within the canon,<ref>Augustine, Saint, City of God, Book 20, Chapter 3.</ref><ref>Calvin, John, "Chapter 5," in Institutes of the christian religion: Book second, edited by Henry Beveridge (Peabody MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2017), 210.</ref> the book's presence in the Bible has been considered a puzzle to some modern scholars. One argument advanced in earlier times was that the name of Solomon carried enough authority to ensure its inclusion; however, other works which appeared with Solomon's name were excluded despite being more orthodox than Ecclesiastes.{{sfn|Diderot|1752 }} Another was that the words of the epilogue, in which the reader is told to fear God and keep his commandments, made it orthodox; but all later attempts to find anything in the rest of the book that would reflect this orthodoxy have failed. A modern suggestion treats the book as a dialogue in which different statements belong to different voices, with Kohelet himself answering and refuting unorthodox opinions, but there are no explicit markers for this in the book, as there are (for example) in the Book of Job.

Yet another suggestion is that Ecclesiastes is simply the most extreme example of a tradition of skepticism, but none of the proposed examples match Ecclesiastes for a sustained denial of faith and doubt in the goodness of God. Martin A. Shields, in his 2006 book ''The End of Wisdom: A Reappraisal of the Historical and Canonical Function of Ecclesiastes'', summarized that "In short, we do not know why or how this book found its way into such esteemed company".{{sfn|Shields|2006|pp=1–5}}