Jordan W. Jones and Christopher Pascarella, Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs (Kerux)

2 weeks ago 11

Jones, Jordan W. and Christopher Pascarella. Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs. A Commentary for Biblical Preaching and Teaching. Kerux Commentaries. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Ministry, 2024. 355 pp. Hb. $34.99 Link to Kregel Ministry

In this new volume in Kregel’s Kerux series, Jordan W. Jones (PhD, Hebrew Union College) provides an exegesis of Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs. Jones serves as assistant professor of biblical studies at Regent University School of Divinity. He has previously published She Opens Her Hand to the Poor: Gestures and Social Values in Proverbs (Gorgias Press, 2019). Pastor of Lincroft Bible Church in New Jersey, Christopher Pascarella (DMin, SBTS) writes the preaching strategies for the commentary.

In the introduction to Ecclesiastes (pages 33-54), Jones suggests the author is an inspired scribe in the tradition of the Israelite monarchy whose teachings are presented by the narrator” (33). A later writer adopted Solomon’s persona, so Ecclesiastes is “essentially Solomonic.” It is wisdom first presented by Solomon but not written down until much later. He calls this later writer the frame narrator, referring to the literary frame (1:1-2; 12:8-14). The book was “conceived early but presented late” (41). The rest of the book is an accurate reflection of Solomon’s teaching. For some conservative readers, the idea Solomon is not the actual author of Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs may come as a surprise. But this reflects a broad consensus in contemporary scholarship, including that of many evangelical writers.

Jones agrees that the language of Ecclesiastes is late, coming from the Persian or pre-Hellenistic period. Concerning the occasion, scholars often suggest that Ecclesiastes is a counterbalance to the book of Proverbs. The Qohelet (as the author of Ecclesiastes is frequently called), responds to “a caricature of established wisdom” (43). He is not subverting proverbs. Like Job, the writer can affirm Proverbs and express honest angst at the disillusionment that comes when proverbial wisdom does not work out quite right. Jones demonstrates that the book is structured similarly to Egyptian and Mesopotamian autobiographical texts, which often include accomplishments, affirmations of ethical conduct, and admonitions to the reader (in this, he is following Tremper Longman’s 1998 commentary). Ecclesiastes is a “wisdom-centric autobiography” (45).

Jones summarizes the theological emphasis of Ecclesiastes in four points. First, Jones shows that Ecclesiastes is interested in the eternality of God and the futility of human endeavor. Human endeavors are temporary, and they lack substance. Second, the works of God and their incomprehensibility. Humans do not even know the things we think we know! Third is future judgment. Even though the book of Ecclesiastes does not have a fully formed view of life after death, the book is clear that the wicked will be judged 8:10-11. Fourth, Jones describes the Qohelet’s “holy disillusionment.” Qohelet is a realist who views the world in an enigmatic way. He has this affection for the world’s false forms of salvation.

Jones makes similar observations about the author and date of the Song of Songs. In his introduction to the Song (211–224), he suggests that the author was “an inspired scribe in the tradition of Solomonic wisdom.” He dates the book to the eighth to sixth century B.C. There are some parallels to Egyptian love poetry, but in linguistic arguments are not conclusive for dating the book. He suggests the book was possibly written during Hezekiah’s revival of wisdom (215).

The original hears of the song of songs would understand that the text is a collection of romantic love songs. They would not have fought. The book was an allegory for God’s relationship with Israel. Jones rejects allegorical interpretation since it distracts readers from the Song of Songs as wisdom and literature, describing human sexual love (216). He briefly discusses various methods of interpretation, from highly allegorical to highly literal. He suggests allegory was used early, even as early as the translation of the book, where some of the sexuality is downplayed. The book has been interpreted in “innumerable strange ways throughout the centuries” (217). Jones considers allegorical strategies an “interpretive paralysis,” implying the meaning of the Song is lost and cannot be recovered.

Even modern writers still argue for allegorical (Ellen Davis, 2000) or typological (James Hamilton, 2015) approaches. In his 1993 NAC commentary, Duane Garrett suggested typology is just another way of “letting allegory in the back door.” For most commentaries, the theology of Song of Songs is the most challenging aspect of the book. Besides a possible reference in 8:6, why is God never mentioned in the book? Is the book really about love and a sexual relationship? Jones summarizes the theology of the book and two points. First, romantic love is informed by God’s wisdom and, therefore, looks different than the love of other ancient Near Eastern cultures (to say nothing modern examples of love). Second, romantic love can serve as an analogy for love’s power and worth. He suggests this can be an analogy for the relationship between God and his church in the new covenant. But this is not allegory or typology: Jones is drawing an analogy (so he gets to the same place allegory and typology does by calling it analogical).

Jones and Pascarella divide Ecclesiastes into ten preaching units and Song of Songs into nine. Each unit begins with a review of the exegetical idea, a theological focus, a preaching idea, and preaching pointers for the passage. Jones’s exegesis is based on the Hebrew Bible (all Hebrew appears without transliteration). All secondary literature is cited in-text, and there are no footnotes in the commentary. In previous Kerux commentaries, authors included a box-like sidebar called “Translation Analysis” to deal with lexical and syntactical details or to compare various English translations. This information appears in the body of the commentary. There are no Translation Analysis” boxes in the commentary. I see this as an improvement that makes the commentary more readable. The commentary strives to place these books in their proper ancient Near Eastern context. Jones often points out how this background illuminates the text, and illustrations (cuneiform tablets and inscriptions, often drawn from Pritchard’s Ancient Near East in Pictures) are scattered throughout the commentary.

Pascarella’s homiletical suggestions are well done. These are some of the shortest “preaching ideas” I have seen in the Kerux series, brief and to the point. In the “creativity in presentation” section, his cultural references are relevant and up to date. Each preaching unit ends with a few bullet points that form a sermon outline and a series of discussion questions that will guide sermons toward the appropriate application of these difficult sections of the Bible.

As with other Kerux volumes, many sidebars for cultural background, theology, or technical details go beyond what would typically be in the body of a commentary. In the Ecclesiastes commentary, for example, Jones has sidebars on Contradictions in Ecclesiastes, the Meaning of Vanity, Royal Identity in the Ancient Near East, Futility in Gilgamesh, Responding to Divine Omnipotence and Human Powerlessness, Life after Death in Qohelet, the Folly of Anger; Relevance of Wisdom and Ecclesiastes 10:2 and Qohelet and Women. A two-page sidebar is on the Women’s Glorious Appearance in Song of Songs. Other interesting sidebars include Ambiguity in the Song and Sexual Metaphors and Innuendo.

Conclusion. Preaching Ecclesiastes in a way that is faithful to the text can be difficult. Preaching Song of Songs is fraught with difficulties. Jones and Pascarella offer pastors and teachers a way to present the challenging books to their congregations in a way that respects ancient culture and the author’s original intention. The commentary encourages appropriate application without excessive allegorical or typological methods (especially in Song of Songs).

NB: Thanks to Kregel for kindly providing me with a review copy of this book. This did not influence my thoughts regarding the work.

Other volumes reviewed in this series: