There is evidence that orthodox editors may have, here and there, added thoughts tending to correct the author’s pessimism, and uphold the doctrine of God’s supremacy.
Such an addition: “Fear God and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment.” 12:13,14.
One theory of authorship of Ecclesiastes contends that:
A. The first author was a Greek philosopher.
B. The next editor was a Sadducean Jew.
C. The book was revised by an Epicurean, followed by a “wisdom” editor.
D. The last of the redactors was a pious Hebrew who sought to introduce touches of orthodox theology.
Critics claim that there are thirty-seven kinds of teaching in the book.
Maybe the trouble in Ecclesiastes represents the conflict of an orthodox Jew’s becoming a Greek humanist-complicated by the later ideas of wisdom editors.
When all is said and done, we still think the book was originally written by one person.
It has been suggested that this book was not written for the general public, but as a textbook for the wisdom schools.
Ecclesiastes reflects many teachings found in Greek, Egyptian, Iranian, and Babylonian literature.
Ecclesiastes uses Elohim for God. The outlook is universalistic. The name Israel occurs only once.
The book does not regard “nature” as a revelation of God.
But the author did regard God as a Creator. But nature seemed to be a “soulless mechanism.”
Koheleth depersonalizes all nature. His thought is highly modern in concept.
The account of opposites and contrasts is the most impressive part of the book.
The book is strongly fatalistic and deterministic.
The book is strongly predestination in philosophy.
At death “all go to one place-both man and beast.” There is little hope of a future life.
The doctrine of Ecclesiastes is found in 2:24,25. “There is nothing better for a man than that he should eat and drink, and find enjoyment in his toil. This also, I saw, is from the hand of God; for apart from him who can eat or who can have enjoyment?”
On the other hand, the book declares that “happiness is the gift of God.”
The whole book, like Proverbs, exalts wisdom. Only the wise discover the “meaning of life.”
The whole book is marked by Hebrew skepticism, like the 28th chapter of Job.
But all are warned against depending on wisdom without the recognition of God.
But still the author was a conformist.
The real theology of the book is to be found in the epilogue.
The God of mercy and love is never mentioned. Prayer is not anywhere noted.
After all, the book, taken as a whole, seems to repudiate the “humanism” which at first seems to be the keynote of the book.
Koheleth was an opportunist-he was something of a modern pragmatist.
But it is a far cry from these teachings to the New Testament gospel of the heavenly kingdom. Note: ECCLESIASTICUS-The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach-is one of the outstanding books of the Apocrypha, and in many respects is very much like Ecclesiastes. Some have found it difficult to understand how the one got into the sacred canon, while the other got left out.