06.19. The Wisdom Literature

Chapter 18 The Wisdom Literature

There are certain books under the general title of the “Holy Writings” that are sometimes designated the Wisdom Literature, particularly Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. To quote another, in many points “these are distinguished from the prophetic literature of Israel in that they express the philosophy of reflective minds rather than the express messages of Jehovah.” They are inspired, of course, but the God who inspired them has more than one style of rhetoric, and uses all classes of minds in the production of his literary works just as he had originally made them to be used. “The human authors of these books do not deal with human experience and the problems of existence with the intense and high-wrought devotion, and the irresistible enthusiasm of the prophets when they exclaim, ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ but their thoughts nevertheless are made subservient to the highest purposes, and they utter, like the prophets, truths deeper than they knew, and words which awaited the interpretation of time.” In Solomon’s day, and later, there was a distinct class of leaders among the people, known as “Wise Men,” or “Teachers of Wisdom,” who went about among the people holding classes for instruction something like the philosophers of Greece. They delighted in colloquies and discussions, and the words spoken of Wisdom in the abstract, Proverbs 8:2-4 (Revised Version), had probably a literal fulfillment in the habits and methods of its professors. (The Bible Hand Book, p. 584). The reader will find interest in looking up this passage. A proverb is a short sentence conveying moral truth in a concise and pointed form. It is a style of communication exciting attention, exercising ingenuity, and fastening truth on the mind in an agreeable and impressive way, and in the case of Solomon’s proverbs its elegance and force are increased by the poetic parallelisms in which they are written. Nearly every sentence is antithetical or explanatory, and attending to corresponding clauses will often fix the reading and determine the sense. That Solomon was the principal author of Proverbs, is indicated therein by Proverbs 1:1, and Proverbs 25:1, compared with 1 Kings 4:29-32. The last two chapters, however, seem to be the work of other authors to whom reference is made in the text. Perhaps it is not necessary to suppose even that Solomon collected and edited the whole book, indeed, it contains a plain statement that this was not true of a portion of it. See Proverbs 25:1-28; Proverbs 26:1-28; Proverbs 27:1-27; Proverbs 28:1-28; Proverbs 29:1-27. The ground for ascribing Ecclesiastes to Solomon are fourfold: (1) The indirect claim of the book itself as gathered from Ecclesiastes 1:1; Ecclesiastes 1:12; (2) the general opinion of Jews and Christians from the earliest times; (3) the fitness of Solomon to write it; (4) the lack of agreement among critics as to any other author or period. And yet modern criticism places its composition at a much later period on the ground of the evidence of its language and its contents. If it be asked how this can be done in the face of the indirect claim of the book, it is replied that it is only indirect, and that while the writer may be “identified as Solomon,” it is only ideally, as though his spirit spoke in the words, “I was king.”

We quote from our own earlier work on this book when we remark that its design seems to be to show the insufficiency of all earthly objects to confer happiness, and thus prepare man to receive the true happiness in Christ when presented to him. It is not affirmed that this was the design present in the mind of the human writer, but that it was the design of the Holy Spirit who inspired the writing.

There are many different plans or theories of the book. In the first place, there are those who conceive of it as a formal treatise on the vanity of human affairs. There are others who think it merely a collection of disconnected thoughts and maxims. A third class speak of it as a kind of sustained dialogue between a teacher and his pupils, as suggested in the introduction to the book of Proverbs. A fourth regard it as a biography of Solomon’s own life, and a fifth, as an ideal book of the experience of the natural as distinguished from the spiritual man. This last does not necessarily exclude any of the others, but rather explains, perhaps, why anyone of them may be taken as the correct view. In the reading of this book it is ever to be kept in mind that some of its conclusions are only partially true and others altogether false, such as Ecclesiastes 2:16; Ecclesiastes 3:19; Ecclesiastes 9:2, etc. And if it be asked, How then can the book be inspired? the answer is that in contending for the inspiration of the Bible we do not claim the inspiration of the men, but the writings; while in the latter case it is not meant that every word thus written is true, and in that sense God’s Word, but that the record of it is true. That is, God caused it to be written down that this or that man felt this or that way, and said thus and so, and hence the record of how he felt and what he said is God’s record, and in that sense inspired.

Internal evidence seems to confirm the voice of antiquity that Solomon wrote the Canticles or Song of Songs (see 1 Kings 4:32), whose title carries with it the idea that it is the best of all his songs. Moreover, although it is not quoted in the New Testament, yet it always formed part of the Old as far as we have record, and, like all the other books, was in the canon of sacred Scripture which Jesus and his apostles recognized as such. When it was written is not known, but its imagery seems to be drawn from the marriage of Solomon either with Pharaoh’s daughter or some native of Palestine, espoused some years later, of noble birth, though inferior to her husband. For the first idea compare such places as 1 Kings 3:1; 1 Kings 7:8-51; 1 Kings 8:1-66; 1 Kings 9:1-24, with Song of Solomon 1:9, and Song of Solomon 6:12, and for the second, look at the language of the song, Song of Solomon 2:1; Song of Solomon 7:1; Song of Solomon 1:6. A modern interpretation which Angus and others mention, gives an entirely different turn to the drama. The heroine is betrothed to a shepherd youth in Northern Palestine, where she is seen and wooed by Solomon, who takes her in his train to Jerusalem; but she proves unmovable to his attentions and faithful to her true lover, to whom she is in the end happily married with the king’s approval. The name “Canticles” which the book sometimes bears, however, suggests as a third idea that it is not one continued poem, but “a succession of lyrics, composed to be sung at a marriage feast.” While this view removes some difficulties, it has nevertheless not been very extensively accepted by the scholars. All evangelical expositors are agreed however, that whatever view we take of the origin or groundwork of the book its higher aim is to set forth allegorically the relation of God to his ancient people, or of Christ to his church, or both. Every reader of the Bible knows that the union of Jehovah with Israel, and that of Christ and His church are represented under the same figure of marriage. See such passages as Psalms 45:1-17; Isaiah 54:6; Jeremiah 2:2; Hosea 2:14-23; Matthew 9:15; John 3:29; Ephesians 5:23-27, etc.