Green - Lapsley - Old Testament and Ethics - A Book-By-Book Survey

Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013. – 240 p.

ISBN 978-0801049354

 

Ethics may be defined as disciplined reflection concerning moral conduct and character. In Scripture, such reflection is always disciplined by convictions about God’s will and way and by commitments to be faithful to God. Biblical ethics is inalienably theological. To sunder biblical ethics from the convictions about God that surround it and sustain it is to distort it. The fundamental unity of biblical ethics is simply this: there is one God in Scripture, and it is that one God who calls forth the creative reflection and faithful response of those who would be God’s people.

 

That unity, however, is joined to an astonishing diversity. The Bible contains many books and more traditions, each addressed first to a particular community of God’s people facing concrete questions of conduct in specific cultural and social contexts. Its reflections on the moral life, moreover, come in diverse modes of discourse. They come sometimes in statute, sometimes in story. They come sometimes in proverb, sometimes in prophetic promises (or threats). They come sometimes in remembering the past, sometimes in envisioning the future. The one God of Scripture assures the unity of biblical ethics, but there is no simple unitive understanding even of that one God or of that one God’s will. To force biblical ethics into a timeless and systematic unity is to impoverish it. Still, there is but one God, to whom loyalty is due and to whom God’s people respond in all of their responses to changing moral contexts.

 

* * *

 

Ecclesiastes

Eunny P. Lee

 

Moral formation is an important goal of wisdom literature, and Ecclesiastes is no exception. The title derives from the Greek translation of the Hebrew word qōhelet, which means “gatherer of an assembly” and functions as a pen name for the author. According to the epilogue, Qoheleth was a sage who “taught the people” (12:9 [hence the NRSV rendering “Teacher”]). But the teachings of this sage, marked by incongruities and radical skepticism, have perplexed readers, both ancient and modern. Qoheleth himself was perplexed by what he observed in the world, repeatedly declaring that “all is vanity [hebel].” The Hebrew word hebel literally means “vapor” or “breath” and is used as a metaphor for the ephemeral, incomprehensible, and unreliable dimensions of life, whatever is beyond the grasp of mortals. Because of the ubiquity of this motif (thirty-eight occurrences), many conclude that Qoheleth is a thoroughgoing cynic who despairs of finding anything good in life. Others, however, highlight the equally persistent counterpoint of joy that runs throughout his discourse with ever-increasing urgency and verve. There is a growing recognition that the book cannot be reduced to either one of these sentiments; indeed, the contradictions are part and parcel of its message.

 

Observation of moral incongruities leads Qoheleth to overturn all notions of human certitude. However, he does not give up his quest to determine what is good (2:3). He presses on to address fundamental questions: What does it mean to be human? How should one live in a world beyond human control?

 

In reconstructing his moral vision, Qoheleth critically engages traditional sources: wisdom teachings, Torah, Solomonic traditions, as well as other ancient Near Eastern literature. A hallmark of the wisdom tradition, however, is its empirical, contextual, life-centered approach to moral reflection. Qoheleth accordingly gives considerable authority to his own perception and experience. Under the guise of the wise king par excellence, he sets out on an ambitious program to investigate “all that is done under heaven” (1:13). His favorite verb is rʾh (“to see, experience”), and he is most often the explicit or implicit subject. Qoheleth reports what he sees: injustice and oppression (3:16; 4:1; 8:9), the unpredictability of divine economy (2:26; 6:1–3), contradictions between traditional precepts and reality (7:15; 8:10–14; 9:11–13). He communicates his findings through literary vehicles that capture the imagination: memorable proverbs, gripping anecdotes, evocative poems. In short, the sage employs all the resources of the wisdom tradition, both its method and its forms, to lend weight to his teachings and to recast traditional profiles of wisdom.

 

Another element in Qoheleth’s account of the moral life is the fear of God (3:14; 5:6; 7:18; 8:12–13; 9:2; 12:13). Rejecting sentimental religiosity, Qoheleth emphasizes the vast distance between God and humanity. Creation is ordered by God, and norms for the good life are a part of this design. But its logic is hidden from mortals, for God is wholly other (3:11; 5:2). God’s inscrutable determination of events and the contingencies of an unpredictable world impinge on human agency, so that humans must relinquish control. They can respond only to what happens, moment by moment (3:1–15; 7:13–14). That is not to say that foresight is useless (10:10). Qoheleth does value wisdom, but he also exposes its limits and vulnerabilities. His teachings are therefore built on humble grounds that recognize both the tragic limitations and the joyous possibilities in humanity’s “portion.”

 

Qoheleth’s ethic of enjoyment is all the more compelling because of its unflinching realism. Enjoyment entails perceiving things rightly; it is “seeing the good” or “seeing well” (2:1; 3:13; 5:17; 6:6, 9; 7:14; 11:9). The verb rʾh connotes not only observation but also the meaningful integration of what one “sees.” And Qoheleth urges his audience to encounter fully both the good and the bad (7:14a). He endorses not a hedonistic ideal that is intent on avoiding pain and maximizing pleasure, but rather an authentic and full-blooded experience of the world.

 

Enjoyment is described also in terms of the basic pleasures that sustain life: eating, drinking, working, sleeping, being with one’s beloved (2:24–26; 3:12–13, 22; 5:17–19; 7:14; 8:15; 9:7–10; 11:7–12:1). Qoheleth thus presents a material and concrete understanding of the good life. Enjoyment is located resolutely in the fulfillment of fundamental needs, including not only physical but also vocational and relational pleasures. These are the things that God provides in order to make and keep human life human. They describe in concrete terms the desirable goals of life.

 

By associating enjoyment with basic needs, Qoheleth opposes the insatiability of the human appetite that can lead to destructive consumption. Enjoyment therefore has important socioeconomic implications. Indeed, the book’s preoccupation with such issues is suggested by its frequent use of commercial terms. Although the debate about the book’s provenance is ongoing (with recent scholarship converging on the postexilic period), Qoheleth clearly addresses an economically volatile context in which opportunities for wealth existed alongside risks of financial disaster. To hedge against possible loss, people toil away for more and more in an obsessed attempt to find some security or advantage. The acquisitive impulse that Qoheleth observes takes on a heightened virulence in contemporary culture, shaped by its technology of mass communication in service to a consumerist ethos. In contrast, Qoheleth’s ethic of joy commends the habit of contentment. Enjoyment is not about the pursuit of more, but rather is the glad appreciation of what is already in one’s possession by “the gift of God.” Likewise, his work ethic is intimately connected with life’s simple joys, not the pursuit of an elusive profit (Brown, “Whatever Your Hand Finds to Do”).

 

Moral formation takes place in community; Qoheleth, however, seems to dwell in isolation, with communal concerns absent from his self-referential monologue. Nevertheless, a communal vision may be teased out from what he bemoans in his reflections. When he observes the plight of the oppressed, what disturbs Qoheleth is not only the fact of oppression but also that those who suffer have “no one to comfort them” (4:1). He also laments the absurdity of a solitary miser who toils away, with no companion to share in his riches (4:7–8). The focus of Qoheleth’s despair is the unmitigated isolation of these individuals. In contrast, two are better than one (4:9–12).

 

A social dimension is also implicit in his most common metaphor for enjoyment, eating and drinking, which in the moral world of the OT takes place in the context of community. Qoheleth, admittedly, does not describe communal meals, but his rhetoric concerning the proper use of food suggests that an individual’s enjoyment must never come at the expense of neighbor. He condemns irresponsible forms of feasting, which impede a person’s capacity to fulfill social obligations (10:16–20). In contrast, the ethical life is characterized by a different kind of recklessness. The exhortation to “send out your bread upon the waters” (11:1–2) is a call to perform charitable deeds with abandon, and it constitutes an important expansion of Qoheleth’s ethic of enjoyment. One must enjoy the bread in one’s possession; one must also gladly release it for the benefit of others.

 

Bibliography