Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] Qohelet

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: James Read <J.Read-2 AT sms.ed.ac.uk>
  • To: George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>
  • Cc: B-Hebrew <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Qohelet
  • Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 16:39:27 +0100

Hi,

you've raised a lot of interesting points George. I think we've established that this tradition is old. The question is how old? We can't trace this with any kind of accuracy because all we have is fragmental evidence in the transmission chain of the tradition.

However, one question I would like to ask you is this. How old do you date the traditions found in the Babylonian Talmud? I was sure we have quite old fragments of the Talmud and a post-exilic authorship of Qohelet seems less and less likely.

I think the only things we can say for sure are:

1) It could not have been authored any later than the 3rd century BCE because it is extensively quoted in late 2nd century BCE.

2) It could not be any older than David because the author claims to be the son of David.

3) We have a tradition that it was originally authored by Solomon but the Babylonian Talmud gives us the impression that it was Hezekiah and his mob that actually put pen to paper.

4) It's presence in the LXX translation may also be significant to the dating debate.

5) Existence of targum versions of Qohelet may also be relevant to the discussion.


All in all, I think there are far more clues to be considered than the presence of a couple of words of debatable foreign origin.

James Christian

Quoting George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>:

That's my point exactly, James. The Babylonian Talmud is so much later than Solomon, I find it difficult to see how it could have accurate knowledge of the author of Qohelet. Whether the tradition links it to Solomon or not, the tradition in the Talmud is late, and therefore of questionable value.

But besides, what does it mean for Solomon to be the author of Qohelet, and yet the book be written down much later? What does 'much later' mean here? Would it not mean that Solomon is not really the author? Or does 'much later' mean 'in Solomon's final years'? If so, then the problem I've mentioned above is magnified even more.

To summarise: The tradition connecting Qohelet to Solomon is old, but not old enough to offer anything of real value. At best, the tradition simply tells us what people thought of Qohelet around the turn of the era - nothing more.


Regards,

GEORGE ATHAS
Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
www.moore.edu.au

_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew





--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page