Ecclesiastes: A Book of Philosophy. Humans differ from any other species on the earth. Our superior brain gives us a

Transcription

1 Nisley, Josh 1 Josh Nisley Mr. Stephen Russell Old Testament Survey 21 November 2008 Ecclesiastes: A Book of Philosophy Humans differ from any other species on the earth. Our superior brain gives us a tremendous reasoning capacity that probes the depths of human existence. This intellect is closely intertwined with our spirituality, our immaterial part that seeks answers from something beyond ourselves. Throughout the history of human existence, God worked to reveal himself to and develop a relationship with his people, the pinnacle of his creation. The Old Testament chronicles the story of God s people, the Israelites. God chose these people to reveal himself to all nations. The Bible chronicles this story as well as writings that came out of this time period. A section of these writings is known as Wisdom Literature from which comes the book of Ecclesiastes. Many have debated the value of including Ecclesiastes in the canon because of its apparent godlessness. Nonetheless, after evaluating the book, Peter Kreeft in his book Three Philosophies of Life, calls Ecclesiastes the great of all books of philosophy (15). The content, logic, and personality of Ecclesiastes verifies this claim. First of all we need to define philosophy. Often, just the word conjures up images of old, robed men stroking their flowing white beards and contemplating deep questions. We also may think of universities where professors and students hold seminars and debates. Most nonintellectuals probably cringe at the mention of the word because of these very images. Even the

2 Nisley, Josh 2 various dictionaries strongly associate philosophy with the academic world. The New Oxford American Dictionary defines philosophy as the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, esp. when considered as an academic discipline. The etymology also connotes philosophy as a lofty intellectual term; the word originates from the Greek word philosophia which means the love of wisdom. One definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, however, reveals a deeper, more personal meaning of philosophy by defining it as the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group. Whether we realize it or not, we all live out of our individual philosophy. Our beliefs shape our decisions, goals, and perceptions. Thus, philosophy is not just for the intellectual. It also involves the common man because at some point everybody needs to answer life s ultimate question of meaning. Of course, philosophy is also an academic discipline, and we need to reckon with this when dubbing Ecclesiastes as the greatest philosophy book ever written. Critics often dismiss Ecclesiastes as the senile ramblings of an old man, presumably King Solomon. 1 The author does not use a strict form to present his ideas, a highly-valued discipline in the formal study of philosophy. Because of this, he often seems to ramble and at times even changes his mind. Instead of presenting his thoughts with clean, objective methodology, he involves much emotion. All these objections contain some legitimate points, yet we need to consider the basic qualities for great philosophy. Is the greatness and brilliance of a philosophy essentially measured by the form in which it is presented? Is the clean and articulate method of logic really the best? However necessary and good, the emphasis on form in modern philosophy has shifted 1 The authorship of Ecclesiastes is subject to debate, but for the sake of the discussion, Solomon will be used.

3 Nisley, Josh 3 our focus away from the actual content of the question. Perhaps this overemphasis on form came as a way of avoiding the reality of the burning question that demands an answer--the question of meaning. Without orthodox form or tact, Solomon faces this ultimate question of human existence with gut-wrenching honesty. This is philosophy that reckons with reality. This is great philosophy. Ecclesiastes presents the world and our human existence as essentially meaningless. As the earth spins and revolves in the midst of a vast, swirling cosmos for who knows how many years, we are born. Throughout out our several decades of existence, we experience some pleasure and enjoy life at times, but typically we feel more pain than enjoyment. Even our enjoyment eventually becomes toilsome. Everything that we see tends toward a state of disorder. We desire the pleasure of life and resist the pain, but after several brief years, the law of entropy wreaks havoc on our physical bodies and we die. Why? What is the point? The hopelessness of this situation demands an honest answer. Solomon presents his argument for meaninglessness in a very logical form, contrary to the claims of many critics. The form is less explicit than most and very different than the rigid form developed by the Greeks and used by modern philosophers. The author writes disjointedly at times, but this very disjointedness in form brilliantly presents his argument for the meaninglessness of life. As Kreeft said, The book s rambling is deliberate, for this form perfectly expresses its content, its message: that life rambles to nowhere. [... ] Its form is one with its content: the test of great poetry (24). We often credit the Greeks for developing the form of proper argumentation. Although Solomon existed long before the Greeks, he used the same basic form to develop his devastating,

4 Nisley, Josh 4 yet perfectly logical conclusion about the ultimate meaninglessness of life. At the core of all logic lies a syllogism that makes two statements and draws a conclusion. Kreeft presents the following syllogism: All toil is under the sun. And all under the sun is vanity. Therefore, all toil is vanity. (35) Before making these statements about toil and vanity, Solomon experimented with each in a logical way and recorded his findings in the book (Kreeft 37). First of all he experimented with wisdom, but soon discovered that wisdom only raises more questions than what it can answer. Wisdom did not satisfy because it explained nothing. It merely affirmed that everything was in fact meaningless. Meaning cannot be found in studying meaningless things. By denying spiritual reality and reducing humans to purely physical pieces of matter, existentialism confirms this truth. Knowledge, because it stems from purely physical aspects, is no longer trustworthy. Solomon acknowledged this futility after his experiment with wisdom. After wisdom Solomon experimented with hedonism, the unabashed pursuit of pleasure. Many modern, naturalistic philosophies that deny the existence of God advocate this approach towards finding meaning. Since no eternal meaning exists, people seek immediate pleasure. Some spend all their lives pursuing riches and fame. Others turn to drugs or sex for their thrills. Solomon recorded his experimentation with pleasure and concluded that pleasure is essentially meaningless. Pleasure always requires increased dosages, and many people die completely unsatisfied. Living for the moment simply avoids the terrifying question of death. King Solomon gained enormous power that most men and women only dream about. As monarch at the apex of Israel s reign he controlled trade which accumulated great riches for him

5 Nisley, Josh 5 and the kingdom. Because of his political status he could marry virtually any woman that he desired. Solomon had complete control over his pleasure. Kreeft states that power is broader than pleasure because it includes power over pleasure (41). Solomon experienced this complete power, but still he lamented the meaninglessness of life. After selfishly pursuing pleasure for himself in search of meaning, Solomon gave up and turned to philanthropy thinking that sharing his goods would bring his life a sense of worth. Solomon soon realized, though, that sharing his meaningless things simply spread meaninglessness to other people. Many modern celebrities and businesspeople try this method of finding purpose. By giving millions to good causes they think their lives will have meaning. The postmodern generation seek meaningful jobs instead of merely well-paying jobs. Though these attempts are good in many respects, they remain incomplete. By addressing the quest for meaning in a short-term sense the ultimate question remains neglected. Finally, Solomon experimented with religion. He acknowledged that God existed and that God created the world and its people. However, even this acknowledgment failed to satisfy his quest for purpose. At one point Solomon even acknowledged that God gives wealth, possessions, and honor, so that he lacks nothing of all that he desires, but in a gloomy conclusion he stated that God does not give him power to enjoy them, but a stranger enjoys them (Holy Bible. Ecc. 6.2). Solomon came very close to the truth here, but he failed to see an accurate picture of God. Instead of seeing God as the answer to his question, he merely saw God as a impersonal force. He then concluded that living in such a state is also completely vain. Solomon s horrifying conclusion logically shows that life in itself is essentially meaningless. We live for unknown causes. Finally we simply live to survive, but nature cares

6 Nisley, Josh 6 nothing for this desire and snuffs out our lives after a few years. Why even struggle for survival if existence is painful anyway? No rational answer exists. For some reason, however, human nature recoils in response to this bleak assessment of existence. We were meant for much more. The ultimate beauty and greatness of Ecclesiastes as compared to other philosophy books comes from its depiction of a personal struggle. All the questions of philosophy eventually need to become personal. This personalizing of the questions grounds them in reality. It is easy for philosophy to get carried away with lofty hypothesizing and argumentation without ever becoming personal. By dealing with the questions on purely academic levels, we can avoid the shocking reality of the answers. Solomon s honesty with the question of meaning shows his sincere desire for an answer. Unlike many modern philosophers Solomon refused to accept the easy answers presented by much of popular philosophy. He refused to ignore the question because he knew the effects of neglecting it. Much of popular philosophy attempts to answer the problem simply by ignoring it. Problem? What problem? Psychologists inform us that we are basically good and that all we need is self-actualization to overcome our destructive behaviors and ideas. We then force ourselves to think positively and delude ourselves into thinking that life depends solely on our outlook. Finally even this fails, so we fill our lives with noise and cheap entertainment, effectively drowning out the question that requires an answer. By doing this we seek an answer before recognizing the problem, and there is nothing more meaningless than an answer without its question (Kreeft 19). Taken to its logical conclusion, a life void of meaning results in a life void of sanity.

7 Nisley, Josh 7 The question presented by Ecclesiastes is the greatest question that man can and should ask. Ecclesiastes accurately portrays the life of man without God. Like many popular philosophies, Ecclesiastes assumes the absence of personal God. Unlike most other godless philosophers, however, the author honestly sees the implications of accepting this meaninglessness. He sees the truth and shudders. Even though the book ends with the question of meaning seemingly unresolved, the author vividly sees his need for God. He distinctly sees God by seeing the stark outline of the darkness that the face of Jesus fills (Kreeft 51). Despite its godless content, Ecclesiastes speaks pure, unadulterated truth--objective truth that divinely reveals God in its godlessness. As Kreeft says, It is divine revelation precisely in being the absence of divine revelation (23).

8 Nisley, Josh 8 Works Cited Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, Kreeft, Peter. Three Philosophies of Life. San Fransico: Ignatius, Philosophy. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary Merriam-Webster Online. 20 November 2008 < Philosophy. New Oxford American Dictionary. 2nd ed