We study the Gospel of John, maybe even Philippians or James, which is very practical. Some books of the Bible are difficult so we tend to avoid them. One that we might steer clear of is this book of Ecclesiastes. What we can't avoid is that it is part of our canon of Scripture and it has been affirmed by the Apostle Paul by the Spirit's inspiration as "profitable" (1 Timothy 3:16f).
Why Study A Difficult Book Like Ecclesiastes?
Why would God give us difficult stuff to read? Let me suggest at the outset why we shouldn't choose the easy road:
#1. Choosing the easy road means we can do it without God. “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Corinthians 2:14, ESV). The difficulty of a passage or book should cause us to admit our need of God's Spirit. Indeed Wisdom Literature reminds us of this in Proverbs 3:5–6 (ESV), 5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. 6 In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.
#2. Difficult Books move us from intellectual study to prayer. As John Piper writes, "I see this in Psalm 119:18, 'Open my eyes, that I may behold wonderful things from Your law.' Seven times in one psalm the psalmist prays, 'Teach me your statutes' (119:12, 26, 64, 68,124, 135, 171). Or as Psalm 25:5 says, 'Lead me in thy truth, and teach me.'"
#3. Tough Bible reading and study makes us think. Why should be read stuff that makes us think? Turn with me to 2 Timothy 2:7 (ESV), "Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything." It would seem that Paul thought Timothy ought to "think" about what he was saying. It might have been easy for Paul just to say that the Lord would give understanding if he prayed about it – but he didn't. He might have even said that the Holy Spirit would whisper the meaning in his heart – but he didn't. He said, "Think over what I say."
How Does One Read Ecclesiastes?
So how are we going to read Ecclesiastes? We are going to:
a) Constantly remind ourselves that Ecclesiastes is “. . . profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16–17, ESV).
b) Try as best we can to wrestle the original meaning from its pages. We are going to try to get into the skin of the Preacher's students.
c) We are going to struggle with its contradictions and surprises. Let me give you an example of how Solomon does this: Note:
i) Ecclesiastes 7:12 (ESV), 12 For the protection of wisdom is like the protection of money, and the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom preserves the life of him who has it.
Now see this à
ii) Ecclesiastes 2:16 (ESV), 16 For of the wise as of the fool there is no enduring remembrance, seeing that in the days to come all will have been long forgotten. How the wise dies just like the fool!
So the contradiction is that wisdom "'preserves life' in 7:12 but fails to do so in 2:16. This apparent contradiction is a writing style of the author, that, in my opinion, gives us the perspective we need to live under the gaze of Heaven.
d) We are going to remain open to God for surprises and some things that will challenge us. For example in Ecclesiastes 2:24 (ESV) we read, "There is nothing better for a person than that he should eat and drink and find enjoyment in his toil. This also, I saw, is from the hand of God." That shocks some people. Some view this as heresy, worldly, hedonistic, etc.
Craig Bartholomew writes in his Baker Commentary of the Old Testament, " Ecclesiastes is not first a kerygmatic [preaching] book, but rather one that calls the reader to engage with Qohelet’s [The Teacher's] journey and to enter into the dialogue he evokes."[2] I share this because although this study is part of our pulpit ministry, if you and I fail to engage with this book on a personal level we will miss the impact. This is a book to wrestle with.
Who Wrote Ecclesiastes?
One surprise that you might have right at the beginning is that many scholars are not dogmatic about the human author. Many assume it is Solomon but that is not confirmed. Also, the jury is out regarding the precise dating of the book. So our goal is to read it without necessary resting totally on Solomon's experience or times. This is a book of practical wisdom that could be read within the Church over and over again with great confidence and relevance.
There are actually 3 human voices in this book. There is also a shift in Ecclesiastes "from third and first person to second-person."[3] Do you remember your English classes?
· First person: Bill went to the store.
· Second person: He went to the store
· Third person: (Bill speaking) "Bill went to the store."
We note that right in the beginning.
1. There is the obvious narrator: He writes, " “The words of the Preacher, the son of David, king in Jerusalem.” (Ecclesiastes 1:1, ESV). So someone is narrator the words of someone called "the Preacher."
2. Then in verse 2 we read, “Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity.” (Ecclesiastes 1:2, ESV). Here this narrator actually tells us the Preacher's words.
3. When we read later in verse 12, we see it is written in the first person: “I the Preacher have been king over Israel in Jerusalem.” (Ecclesiastes 1:12, ESV)
So we need to pay attention to which voice is speaking when we read and study this book.
In my first message, I will be teaching on the theme of the Book. God bless you as we start this journey together.
Pastor Jim.
[2] Bartholomew, C. G. (2009). Baker Commentary on the Old Testament: Ecclesiastes (T. Longman, III, Ed.) (93). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
[3] Bartholomew, C. G. (2009). Baker Commentary on the Old Testament: Ecclesiastes (T. Longman, III, Ed.) (54). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
With Reformation Day this week, it is a good time to remind ourselves of what exactly the differences are between the Roman Catholic Church and Protestants. Certainly on just about every single area of theology there are differences, but here are what I think are the five most glaring and significant issues that separate the Catholic Church from the gospel of grace: 
