Professional Documents
Culture Documents
OT 632 X Syllabus - Rickett
OT 632 X Syllabus - Rickett
ECCLESIASTES:
Exegesis and Exposition
OT632X
Course Description
Ecclesiastes (OT632X) is an expository study of the Book of Ecclesiastes based
on the original language Hebrew text. The course is designed to allow English only
readers opportunity to grapple with the major features of the book while providing
opportunity for those with facility in biblical Hebrew to perform exegesis on the original
language text. These two approaches will be offered as Track A and Track B. Since the
majority of students will likely select the English track (Track A), it will be given
preference. However, much technical material will be expounded and explained in the
classroom.
The present study will be multi-faceted reflecting the unusual characteristics of
the Book of Ecclesiastes. However, special attention will be given to: 1.) the historical,
political, social, and religious background of the book and authorship issues; 2.)
exposition of the content of the book; 3.) the unique contribution Ecclesiastes makes to
worldview studies; and 4.) the implications Ecclesiastes has for biblical counseling.
Course Rationale
Ecclesiastes is a complex book that addresses the biggest philosophical questions
that man faces. At the same time, however, it is arguably the most debated book in the
biblical canon, the most difficult to interpret, and one of the harder to translate. Further,
the profundity, both in depth and breadth, of its content warrants intense analysis.
Classroom study and discussion will provide an opportunity to look at the full
historical, social, and linguistic contexts of the book, as well as its philosophical outlook,
and its relevance to the lives of NT believers.
The choice of the Book of Ecclesiastes for an exposition course is particularly
suited for a study of: 1.) Text and Exposition; 2.) Worldview Study and Analysis; and 3.)
Counseling Implications. This multifaceted study will provide the student with
opportunity to:
3
Course Objectives
Specifically, OT632X will engage the student with the text of the Ecclesiastes in
order to produce the following student learning outcomes. Having taken this course, the
student should be able:
to summarize the problems of authorship for the Book of Ecclesiastes
and convincingly argue for Solomonic authorship
to construct the historical background or setting for the Book of
Ecclesiastes
to identify and offer solutions to the primary interpretive problems in
the text of the book
to recite a basic outline for the contents of Ecclesiastes
to compare and critique Longmans commentary on Ecclesiastes with
other major commentaries and be able to provide a response to
Longman and other more critical approaches
to present a periodical bibliography of significant journal articles
having direct bearing on the interpretation or exegesis of
Ecclesiastes
to prepare sermonic, teaching, and/or counseling material from
Ecclesiastes on the basis of sound interpretation
to explain the genre of Ecclesiastes and its role in the composition of
the book
Required Textbooks
Kidner, Derek. The Wisdom of Proverbs, Job & Ecclesiastes: An Introduction to Wisdom
Literature. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1985.
Longman, Tremper III. The Book of Ecclesiastes. The New International Commentary
on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1998.
Wright, J. Stafford. Ecclesiastes. In The Expositors Bible Commentary. Ed. by Frank
E. Gaebelein, 5:1134-1200. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, Publishing House,
1991.
Recommended Textbooks
Adams, Jay E. Life Under the Son. N.p.: Timeless Texts, 1999.
4
Abbreviated Bibliography
The student is encouraged to use discernment in the use of some of the below
materials as some occasionally reflect presuppositions that are inconsistent with a
thoroughly Christian view of the inerrancy and sufficiency of the Scriptures:
Koheleth, The Man And His world, Gordis, Robert, 1908-, New York, Published
for the Jewish Theological Seminary of America by Bloch Pub.Co., 1955.
Class Procedure
The goals of the class will be accomplished through lectures, class discussion,
the study of the text of Ecclesiastes, reading assignments, annotated bibliography,
a major paper and an exam.
1. Class Attendance
Each student is expected not only to be faithful in class, but to be familiar
with the syllabus and to bring the appropriate textbooks to class each session.
The NASB, ESV, or KJV Bible must be brought to each class session. Other
translations must receive prior approval from the professor. Note: for Track B
students, the BHS edition of the Hebrew Bible and lexicon (Holladay) must
be present in all classes unless otherwise stated. The seminary attendance
policies will be adhered to in this class.
2. Quizzes Exams
Because of the research based structure of the course, there will no quizzes
or a midterm. However, at the end of the semester there will be a final exam.
It will be comprehensive in nature covering all the material presented in the
course. A study guide will be distributed 3 weeks in advance of the exam.
The class period immediately prior to the exam will be utilized for in-class
review. However, the professor will give tips throughout the semester
regarding the final exam.
3. Class Assignments
The assignment schedule, which includes all assignments, e.g. reading,
annotated bibliography and final paper with their due dates, may be found
below. All assignments should be completed by the beginning of the class
period on the day they are due and must be handed in by the end of that class
period. All assignments will be graded in accordance with the school grading
policy.
OR
Track B. Bible Reading (& translation): Hebrew Base Text
(1) Hebrew Text Reading. Students choosing Track B must read
through the Hebrew text of the chapter to be covered in the upcoming class in
advance. A translation is not required and the student may use an English
translation such as the NASB to assist in the reading or even a readers lexicon
to help. However, students must be familiar enough with the Hebrew text to
make significant class contribution.
(2) Translation. The student choosing the Hebrew based exegesis
track will be required to translate 4 key chapters of Ecclesiastes. Chapters 1-3
of Ecclesiastes will be required and one other chapter of the students choosing
(must be reported by week 3). The student will also be invited to offer
relevant original language input and ask questions in class as part of their class
participation score.
Students must be prepared with the written translation of the assigned
chapter at the beginning of the class period of the day that chapter is to be
covered in class. Additionally, these students will be expected to contribute to
the discussion based on their original language reading and translation. As the
passages are covered, the student will have the opportunity to make
changes/corrections on his assignments but must do so in a different color or
different writing medium clearly distinguishable from the original.
Assignments whose corrections cannot be distinguished from the original work
will not be accepted. Translation assignments will be expected to incorporate
the principles covered in Hebrew Exegesis. Translations are graded on a
pass/fail basis. I.e. assignments satisfactorily completed will receive a check
mark indicating credit. Assignments not completed or unsatisfactorily
completed will be handed back to the student to complete and turn in the
following class period.
3.2 Semester Paper. The student will have the opportunity to write a research
paper as follows:
A research paper (exegetical paper for Track B) of 10-30 pages, typed
in thesis form (use Kate L. Turabian, A Manual for Writers of Term Papers,
Theses, and Dissertations, [latest edition]) will be required in three stages:
Stage 3: Final Draft (Week 14) The final draft of the research
paper must be submitted.
4.1 All projects/papers must be submitted on the date due. 10% will be
deducted from the assignment for each class hour it is past due. (For
example: A paper due on a given date will be reduced 10% if submitted
the same day, but after the class. An additional 10% will be subtracted at
the beginning of the next weeks class.)
4.2 The professor reserves the right to refuse any paper that has not been
written in accord with the principles of sound Christian scholarship:
(1) Graduate level research.
(2) Honest use of sources.
(3) Original thought and expression.
(4) Consistent logic.
(5) Scriptural methods of interpretation.
(6) Sensible choice of problem passages.
5. Class Participation
The student will be expected to contribute to the class in the following
ways:
(1) Class study/translation of schedule passages.
(2) Class discussion of schedule passages.
8
6. Grading
The grading for the course will proceed as follows:
Textbook reading assignments 15%
Annotated Bibliography and Review 15%
Semester reading project/translations 15%
Exegetical PaperFirst Draft: 10%
Exegetical PaperFinal Draft: 20%
Class Participation 5%
Final Exam: 20%
100%
Note: The professor reserves the right to weight grading to best reflect the
students strengths.
C O U R S E S C H E D U L E
Appendix A
Sample of Annotated Bibliographies
Alden surveys the first 50 psalms of the Psalter in an effort to identify and
illustrate the occurrence of chiasm in each. Aldens article is detailed and begins by
explaining the origin and meaning of the nomenclature as well as chiastic theory (12).
He then provides several examples of chiasm moving from the more simple to the more
complex. In each, he shows how the chiastic structure should be diagrammed. Alden is
insightful and alerts the reader to the interplay between chiasm and other poetical devices
(15). In some cases the chiastic arrangements seem a bit strained and the outlines a bit
forced (Psalm 7, Psalm 19, p. 15). However, Aldens work at points is nothing less than
brilliant (Psalm 12, p. 17). On pages 12-13, Alden discusses verses within psalms, on
14ff. he discusses psalms whose entire structure is arranged chiastically.
Alden is obviously a scholar but one who is writing in an effort to broaden the
mind and pique the interest of Bible students (13). As a result, he demonstrates
Christian scholarship at its best, that is, academia for the glory of Christ. His work though
scholarly comes across as devotional and he even ends his article in a devotional manner
stating, Gods Word is like a garden, with flowers bright and fair, and everyone who
seeks may pluck a lovely cluster there.
I rate the article: 10
Andersons purpose is to first consider the basic textual evidence of the Psalter
together in addition to the issues related to the evidence. He then discusses the 5 basic
divisions of the Psalter and subsequently discusses the arrangement of the psalms in each.
Anderson raises the interesting idea that there may have been canonical psalms
that are no longer extent. However, he believes the 11QPsa represents a tradition that
developed parallel to that of the MT. It should be noted that the Qumran text cited
contains the same psalms as the MT, but in different order and with additions in books 4-
5.
With regard to Andersons thesis, one wonders how, if the Qumran sect began at
c. 150 BC, and the council of Jamnia ratified the canon well over a hundred years prior to
the Qumran compiling activities, how could the two traditions be parallel? Also, if the
Psalter of the Qumran sect developed at a time significantly after Jamnia, then its Psalter
would have been outside mainstream Judaism and after the OT canon had been closed.
Any hope of lending it credibility would therefore be lost.
Additionally, the LXX presumably represents the beliefs of Jews in that period
and its divisions correspond to those of the MT. It also contains 150 psalms, even though
10
they are not always in the same order. Andersons thesis, though interesting, has more
explaining to do in order to be convincing. Anderson also makes assumptions that are
not quite warranted such as his assumption that Psalms 9 and 10 are a unity.
My rating: 7 (This rating because of interesting material that warrants further
consideration from the reader).
Bateman provides the three views concerning the date of the psalm and delineates
the arguments use for each. He says that there are three positions taken: pre-Israelite,
postexilic, or preexilic. He quickly discards the first position based on lack of evidence.
He subsequently discards the second, listing some 6 reasons why it is fallacious which
leaves him holding to the third view, that is a preexilic composition written during the
days of the monarchy. Bateman then seeks to narrow the dating of the psalm and
considers arguments that hold to a preexilic position but seek to be more specific. The
first of these positions are exotic and Bateman eventually dismisses them. In the end he
resorts to the radical position that David himself composed the psalm as the
superscription indicates and provides the three most potent arguments for his position (for
arguments used to support Davidic authorship, see pgs. 443-5).
In the end, Bateman concludes that David composed the hymn and he did so for
the occasion of Solomons second coronation in 971 BC.
I rate the article: 8
11
Hauser, in his article warns the reader against forcing the text to fit any
preconceived notions about literary style. This is particularly true when it comes to
meter, and its true concerning parataxis. Parataxis, explains Hauser is the placing side
by side of words, images, clauses, or scenes without connectives that directly and
immediately coordinate the parts with one another.
Hauser also notes that paratactic structures employ a variety of rhythmic
techniques without presenting a consistent metrical structure.
Hauser wisely and discerningly approaches the text as seen in his statement,
Rather than trying to emend the obscure sections, it seems best to assume that they point
more to our lack of knowledge of ancient Hebrew vocabulary than to problems of textual
corruption. Hausers article was refreshing, encouraging, and informative.
I rate this article: 9.
12
Appendix C
TRACK B: EXEGTICAL PROCEDURE
R. Brian Rickett
Utilize the syllabus from Hebrew Exegetical Methodology, but follow this
guideline for your paper.
STEP 1: TEXT
Familiarize yourself with the passage
Read the passage aloud in Hebrew to gain a feel for the passage as a unit. Make
sure to read in accord with the masoretic accents. Saturate yourself with the
passage until you are sufficiently familiar with its essentials to be able to keep in
mind its contents, grammatical/syntactical features, flow, style and thought, etc.
STEP 2: TRANSLATE
Perform a preliminary translation (below).
Having read until saturation, delimit the pericope for study and then perform your
preliminary translation (Note: the best sermons are generally limited to only a few
verses that are well treated; a good average is about 3-6 vv. per message). As you
translate, ask questions attempting to be comprehensive yet detailed in your
investigation. Remember, I had 6 good friends who taught me all I knew. Their
names are: What? Where? When? How? Why? and Who? Give special attention
to details.
STEP 3: IDENTIFY
1. Identify grammar, syntax, and semantics.
Identify more specifically the relationships of every word, phrase, clause,
sentence, and paragraph. How and why are they related? Perform a structural
diagram of the pericope paying close attention to both content and grammatical
elements. Identify emphasis and the most prominent elements. Note word order
and the use of thematic (key) or emphatic words or word roots.
2. Next, identify the literary form, i.e. genre (use resources suggested). Then,
identify literary devices such as chiasmus, repetition, inclusion, assonance,
parallelism, paronomasia, etc. List elements by verse below.
14
STEP 4: EXAMINE
Look at the passage in context
Examine the contexts of the passage (immediate and remote) including the
external setting (i.e., ancient near eastern cultural, historical, political, economic,
spiritual, and geographical settings) as well as any parallel passages. Note both
similarities and dissimilarities. Next, list key ideas that are important for your
understanding of the text thus far and which would be helpful to mention to your
audience. Include those items that, if left out, would make you feel cheated as a
listener. List those below.
STEP 5: RESOLVE
Resolve interpretive problems
Make a list of all potential solutions for each significant interpretative problem.
One by one, provide a list of pros and cons for each possible solution. Then,
select the solution that seems to have the best support and seems to best resolve
the interpretive difficulty.
Identify and state the theme, key principle, or argument of the passage in one
sentence (this will be done by examining the collective points the author has
made). Next, perform a provisional outline of your passage making sure to be
faithful to the text. Be sure to identify the outline already present in the text
(rather than creating your own!). Carefully word each of your points in such a
way as to capture precisely the thought the author was conveying. When done
15
correctly, each point should support the main principle. This is your exegetical
outline. Understand that this outline will be modified as you continue to work.
Theme:
_____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
_
G. Put together a list of practical ways your principles can be applied by your
audience and plan for when to appeal your audience (i.e. Application after
each point? Reserved for the end of the message?)
17
Appendix D
PREUSPPOSITIONAL PRAXIS:
A Worksheet Guide for Implementing TAG
R. Brian Rickett
Introduction
For your dialogues (oral and in your paper), utilize the presuppositional method.
This means that you need to employ TAG (Transcendental Argument for the Existence
of God). Remember: Transcendental thinking considers what the fundamental
preconditions must be for any instance of knowledge to be possible. For example, it asks,
What are the necessary preconditions for the intelligible interpretation of reality? The
presuppositional Christian-theist argues that rationality, ethics, and in fact all of reality as
we know it, depend on the Christian God as the ultimate metaphysical precondition (i.e.
TAG). Further, he argues that this fact is revealed in Gods special revelation, but is also
self-attesting, thanks to natural revelation (Rom 1:18-32; Ps 19). The result is that in
failing to submit to the Christian God and in his attempt to be autonomous, the unbeliever
ends up irrational due to his inability to account for his knowledge or resolve the internal
tensions in his worldview.
accepting the gospel can the unbeliever have his spiritual blindness removed, stand in
right relationship to God, and begin to reason correctly. In the end, Jesus Christ is his
only hope.
Transcendental Critique
During the course of an exchange with your unbelieving friend, work through the
4 steps of the transcendental (presuppositional) critique.4 Remember, your apologetic is
person variable, so it is important to find out what he really believes, not simply to
identify the label he uses to describe himself.
Step 1: Identify the opponents crucial presuppositions5. Do this by asking key
worldview questions.6 Then, once you have done the necessary data collecting, proceed
to step 2.7 Step 2: Criticize the autonomous attitude that arises from a failure to honor
the Creator-creature distinction. That is, call the unbeliever to account for his attempt to
operate out from under the authority of God and in accord with his own reasoning. Step
3: Expose the internal and destructive philosophical tensions that attend autonomy. That
is, perform an internal critique (transcendental critique) of his worldview. Demonstrate
to him how his worldview is unable to provide the necessary preconditions for the
intelligible interpretation of reality, i.e. expose the rationalirrational dialectic in his
thinking. Be sure to demonstrate to him how his professed world and life views
convenient. When this happens, the unbeliever unwittingly borrows the Christians worldview in order to
make sense of the facts of the universe and assumes that things are as both believer and unbeliever know
them to be.
4
The following 4 steps are borrowed with some alteration from Bahnsens summary of VanTils
presuppositional critique. Cf. Greg Bahnsen, VanTils Apologetic: Readings & Analysis, p. 10.
5
The following steps are expressed in overly technical language. Another way to express these would be:
1.) Identify what the unbeliever believes or thinks; 2.) rebuke your friend for his failure to submit to God;
3) Show your friend how his espoused worldview is contrived and makes no sense based on what he has
said; 4.) Present the Gospel as the solution to his folly and call him to repent.
6
Use the seven worldview questions from Sire. As a practical matter, it is very
helpful to summarize in your own words the unbelievers answer to each of your
questions asking him if you correctly understand his view. Eg. Do I understand you to
be saying that ? Remember, custom formulate these to be appropriate for the
individual(s) with whom you are interacting. The point is that you want to identify the
distinguishing features of his worldview so that you can challenge the ability of his
worldview to provide the necessary preconditions for the intelligible interpretation of
reality. Then you will want to provide the Christian worldview as the only viable
alternative. Sires questions are: 1.) What is prime realitythe really real? 2.) What is
the nature of external reality, that is the world around us? 3.) What is a human being? 4.)
What happens to a person at death? 5.) Why is it possible to know anything at all? 6.)
How do we know what is right and wrong? 7.) What is the meaning of human history?
Cf. Sire, p. 20. Note: In your paper dialogue, the unbeliever should provide you with
answers to each of the seven worldview questions. This must happen either because the
Christian has asked him the relevant questions or because the interlocutor has voluntarily
provided you with his answers.
7
For logical flow and potency of argumentation, I often save this step for last and argue that it is
due to the unbelievers sin that he is in the state argued for in the other steps.
19
contradict his ultimate presuppositions and render rationality impossible. Step 4: Set
forth the only viable alternative. Expound the Christian position by providing him with
the biblical answer to the tensions you have uncovered in his worldview and specifically
show him how Christian-theism provides the fundamental preconditions for the
intelligible interpretation of reality.
Application
Fill out the worksheet below by answering each question as clearly and succinctly
as possible.
Question 2:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
Question 3:
__________________________________________________________________________ ___________
______________________________________________________________________________________
Question 4:
__________________________________________________________________________ ___________
______________________________________________________________________________________
Question 5:
______________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________
Question 6:
__________________________________________________________________________ ___________
______________________________________________________________________________________
Question 7:
__________________________________________________________________________ ___________
______________________________________________________________________________________
Identify Worldview (to the extent appropriate, label the unbelievers worldview, not
merely his religion, but his worldview, i.e. pantheist, panentheist, etc.):
_______________________
20
Step 2: Criticize the autonomous attitude that arises from a failure to honor the Creator-
creature distinction.
In the space below, write out your criticism.
Step 3: Expose the internal and destructive philosophical tensions that attend autonomy.
Below, list all of the tensions that you can identify. It is helpful to divide these between
those that are metaphysical, epistemological and ethical in nature.
Metaphysical (Clearly list all of the tensions that you can identify in your friends view of
reality):
1.)_____________________________________________________________________________
2.)_____________________________________________________________________________
3.)_____________________________________________________________________________
4.)_____________________________________________________________________________
Epistemological (Clearly list all of the tensions that you can identify in your friends view
of the nature and limits of knowledge):
1.)_____________________________________________________________________________
2.)_____________________________________________________________________________
3.)_____________________________________________________________________________
4.)_____________________________________________________________________________
Ethical (Clearly list all of the tensions that you can identify in your friends view of
morality/value theory):
1.) ____________________________________________________________________________
2.)_____________________________________________________________________________
3.)_____________________________________________________________________________
21
4.)_____________________________________________________________________________
Other (Clearly list all additional tensions/problems that you can identify in your friends
view that you identified from asking worldview questions or as a result of your dialogue
e.g. Do you recognize a specific problem with his teleology, etc.? )
1.)_____________________________________________________________________________
2.)_____________________________________________________________________________
3.)_____________________________________________________________________________
4.)_____________________________________________________________________________
Step 4: Set forth the only viable alternative. In phase 1, provide the Christian
solution/answer to each of the points of tension you identified above8 (i.e. list the
Christian solution to each point of tension above):
Phase 1
1.) ___________________________________________________________________________
2.) ____________________________________________________________________________
3.) ____________________________________________________________________________
4.) ____________________________________________________________________________
8
Reference distinguishing features of your worldview. Be sure to support your claims with
applicable Scripture. Sires propositions are: 1.) God is infinite and personal (triune), transcendent and
immanent, omniscient, sovereign and good. 2.) God created the cosmos ex nihilo to operate with a
uniformity of cause and effect in an open system. 3.) Human beings are created in the image of God and
thus possess personality, self-transcendence, intelligence, morality, gregariousness and creativity. 4.)
Human beings can know both the world around them and God himself because God has built into them the
capacity to do so and because he takes an active role in communicating with them. 5.) Human beings were
created good, but through the Fall the image of God became defaced. Through the work of Christ, God
began the process of redeeming humanity and of restoring people to goodness, though any given person
may choose to reject that redemption [modified from Sire]. 6.) For each person death is either the gate to
life with God and His people or the gate to eternal separation from the only thing that will ultimately fulfill
human aspirations. 7.) Ethics is transcendent and is based on the character of God as good (holy and
loving). 8.) History is linear, a meaningful sequence of events leading to the fulfillment of Gods purposes
for humanity (Cf. Sire pp. 26-44).
22
Phase 2
Gospel (Present the gospel as the final and ultimate solution to your friends spiritual
blindnessprovide the key points of a gospel presentation below):
Problems: (Below list challenges to your worldview that your friend offered that you
need to research or think about as well as aspects of his worldview that you are
unfamiliar with or had a hard time answering. Later, type out your answers to these items
and place them in a file for later reference):
1.) ___________________________________________________________________________
2.) ____________________________________________________________________________
3.) ____________________________________________________________________________
4.) ____________________________________________________________________________