Experts Recommend OT Commentaries: Ecclesiastes
Dr. George Athas Weighs In
OT Commentary Recommendations: Rebooted!
A handful of years ago, I (Nijay Gupta) had a blog series where I asked OT experts to weigh in on their recommendations for OT commentaries. For one reason or another (during the pandemic), I left the series incomplete, and lately I have been motivated to do a reboot! So we are back now with **brand new** posts to complete the series.
Experts Recommend OT Commentaries: Ecclesiastes
Dr. George Athas (Guest Expert)
Dr. George Athas (PhD, University of Sydney) is director of research and senior lecturer in Hebrew and Old Testament at Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia). Some of his recent work includes Bridging the Testaments and a commentary on Ecclesiastes for the Story of God Bible Commentary series. We are fortunate to have his expert advice on Ecclesiastes commentaries today!
Technical
Thomas Krüger (Hermeneia): This series is known for its technical rigour, and Krüger does not disappoint. He gives his own translation of the text, annotated for text critical issues. He then discusses each verse with an eye for the details of grammar and syntax. He places the book’s composition in the Hellenistic Era (correctly, in my opinion), and frequently converses with other scholars in his discussions.
Roland Murphy (Word Biblical Commentary): This is now over 30 years old, but still a goldmine for technical information. Murphy gives his own translation of Ecclesiastes, deals with text critical issues, and does not seek to pour Qohelet (the main speaker of Ecclesiastes) into a prior interpretational mould. He is agnostic on certain issues, but in this way seeks to provide an honest account of what the book says.
Antoon Schoors (Historical Commentary on the Old Testament): This tome is jam-packed with technical discussion of the Hebrew text. Schoors meticulously surveys previous literature on Ecclesiastes, and offers his own reading in conversation with others. He views the book as the product of a sage in the Hellenistic Era . The discussion is dense, but Schoors gives an excellent view of Ecclesiastes scholarship.
Semi-Technical
George Athas (Story of God Bible Commentary): Yes, it’s my own commentary! I seek to read Ecclesiastes against the backdrop of known history, and show how Qohelet is not just being abstract and philosophical. Rather, he is reacting to particular events in the third century bc, and questioning Israel’s entire theological endeavour. I argue that Qohelet wants answers about why God seems to let injustice flourish, but he simply cannot find answers in his own context, leaving him to despair. This then pushes us to look forward to the New Testament. In this way, I trace some theological trajectories in a way that is hopefully useful to preachers.
Non-Technical
William P. Brown (Interpretation): I see Ecclesiastes as mostly pessimistic in outlook, but Brown gives a little more airtime to the book’s positive statements. In this way, he sees the book as both happy and sad. He takes a more agnostic and moderate approach to the dating of Ecclesiastes, arguing that it could fall anywhere in the Persian and Hellenistic Eras. Brown weaves some theological inferences for the modern church into his discussion of what Ecclesiastes means.
Monograph Recommendation
Martin Shields, The End of Wisdom: A Reappraisal of the Historical and Canonical Function of Ecclesiastes: This monograph is one of the best things I’ve ever read on Ecclesiastes. Shields shows how Qohelet, the main speaker of Ecclesiastes, questions much of the received wisdom of his day, but does so from a perspective of orthodoxy. Shields highlights how vivid the rhetoric of Ecclesiastes is in a way that actually makes sense of the many apparent paradoxes in the book. Thoroughly recommended!
What about Goldingay’s recent contribution?
Great idea! Thank you for doing this. Can you post a link to the previous discussions on other books of the Bible?