For all the yip yapping back and forth about word origins, times and
dates that words were used, and other such matters that finally prove
nothing, what do we have in the end. The simple fact is that Qohelet
claims to be a son of David (yes I know it can mean later descendant,
but that is up to you to prove, the text does not say it), and King in
Jerusalem. If the author is not Solomon (forget about any concept of
the Bible being verbally, plenarily inspired), demonstrate who it is
from the evidence available.
If you date this to the second temple period, who was king in Jerusalem
that had all the qualifications that the Qohelet claims to have. The
evidence in 2:7 suggests that you have to find someone greater than
Solomon in all his glory...who qualifies in the second temple period?
The author must have lived in a time of great peace and prosperity
(second temple? really?) and had almost endless time on his hands if he
did what he said he did in the first 2 chapters.
If your conclusion is that the author is lying..why bother with the book
anyway?
The textual evidence, historical evidence, other biblical evidence, and
internal evidence points to Solomon...if that is not the case, please
enlighten me as to who the author is. And please, no flames...just the
author's name.