The Book of Ecclesiastes (review)

Hebrew Studies 40 (1999) 343 Reviews pride in-the English translation of Levi's Song of Songs commentary that Kellner has presented so well. Eric Lawee York University Toronto, Ontario, Canada /awee@yorku.ca THE BOOK OF ECCLESIASTES. By Tremper Longman m. NICOT. pp. xvi + 306. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998. Cloth, $35.00. Ecclesiastes is presently "enjoying" renewed scholarly interest in America (cf. Choon-Leong Seow's encyclopedic Anchor Bible commentary ) and on the continent (the conference proceedings of the 1997 Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense in Leuven are devoted to Qohelet in the context of wisdom), which is nicely complemented by the publication of the first section of Biblia Hebraica Quinta, the megillot. So in this latest installment from Eerdmans' NICOT series, the aims of which are clearly conservative-evangelical, we are offered a timely, competent, and at times, creative commentary. The Introduction has what we should expect, delivered competently and well referenced. For conservative readers, Longman treats issues such as Solomonic authorship sensitively. However, for other readers he is, if anything, far too cautious, conveying to the reader an unnecessary sense of trepidation. On issues such as date and language Longman introduces recent considerations and questions the basis on which many have dated the book late (e.g., arguments from supposed Aramaisms, the influence of Mishnaic Hebrew, and the Phoenician arguments originating from M. Dahood). Throughout this discussion there is a discernible unease with the present consensus of a late date, although Longman eventually, if reluctantly, concludes that language is not a "certain barometer of date" (p. 15). To his credit, he encourages a healthy skepticism of consensus, and on these issues he is more thorough than the recent commentaries of, for example, R. N. Wbybray and R. Murphy. Perhaps the most refreshing aspect of this commentary is Longman's approach to genre. Unlike most (including Seow in his recent work on the subject, "Qohelet's Autobiography" in the David Noel Freedman Festschrift Fortunate the Eyes that See from Eerdmans), Longman rightly identifies the whole work as autobiography (building on his previous work, Fictional Akkadian Autobiography), as opposed to the traditionally regarded "royal fiction" of 1:12-2:26. Hebrew Studies 40 (1999) 344 Reviews The most serious exegetical problem that this reviewer faces-and I predict that others will find this a serious flaw too-is Longman's identification of the book's "nonnative theology" (pp. 32, 36). While Longman (unlike many authors) rightly distinguishes the two separate strategies of Qohelet and the frame narrator, he allows the theology of the latter to dictate the interpretation of Qohelet's words. To give one prominent example, in order to deal with the difficult words of Qohelet at 7:26-29, "it must be remembered that Qohelet is filled with tensions and contradictions since he is a confused wise man. For those concerned that a biblical book appears to support the views of a misogynist, it must also be remembered that the views of Qohelet are not the teachings of the book of Ecclesiastes any more than the speeches of the three friends constitute the nonnative teaching of the book of Job" (p. 204). This is because "the theology of the frame narrator ...is the nonnative theology of the book as a whole" (p. 32). Such footwork makes for a deeply unsatisfying recourse for this reviewer . It should be left to the reader to decide which of the theologies (Qohelet's or the frame narrator's), if either, is "nonnative." And although I would not attribute this to bad scholarship, I might go as far to say that putting such strict confines on the book ("the book ends with three phrases that point away from skeptical thinking and toward a theology consonant with the rest of the Old Testament: wisdom, law, prophets," p. 39) runs the risk of producing immeasurably dull interpretation. Thankfully, that risk is largely avoided in that Longman usually chooses not to remind the reader about that nonnative theology, which consequently frees him to be more theologically adventurous. On some of the traditional interpretive problems there are perhaps some surprises. Longman opts for "meaningless" to translate hebel, arguing that notions such as ephemerality and transience are not...