Indeed. My response was rather brief, you raise very good points worthy of discussion.
First, the question of money and the broader material world in the role of Judaism. Traditionally in the Torah (and in most of the Nevi'im and Ketubim) material wealth is seen as a reward from God tied to observing commandments. In the Torah in particular, it is a visual sign to the other nations of God's favor. Thus, God provides Abraham great material wealth. Not because Abraham covets it or needs it, but because in this way God shows his favor to Abraham. (Cf. Abimelech and Pichol Gen. 21:22) Similarly, the material welath enjoyed by the People of Israel when they occupy the land of Israel is a sign of divine favor, just as the loss of that material wealth is a sign of Divine wrath. (e.g., Deut: 11:13-17). At the same time, however, social stratification, which produces an apparently unfair distribution of wealth, is also addressed in Judaism. Even in the Torah, we are given various tithes and informed of the duties to the poor and the obligation to observe essential social justice. These are framed in the context of God's love of the poor whose cries will arouse his wrath. (Deut: 15:9). Thus, while wealth and material comfort can properly be seen as signs of Divine favor and, at the same time, a test for the individual, poverty is not necessarily a sign of Divine wrath and duty exists on all Israel to succor the poverty-stricken.
Turning to the specific in Kohelet, the interpretation is difficult because of the long Jewish tradition of simultaneously interpreting each individual verse homelitically while at the same time viewing each verse as having a textual meaning within the context of the text (a "p'shat" or "straightforward" explanaition). Even here the p'shat explanation, however, is influenced by the difficulty of language and the question of the broader interpretation of Kohelet and its mixed views on material wealth and Earthly pleasure. For myself, I hold with those interpretations similar to yours that read Kohelet as not condemning wealth per se, but warning that men are easily decieved by wealth, the quest for wealth, and the consequences of wealth.
The specific verse in question is not easily interpreted. The specific verse is Eccl 10:19. I would not read this chapter (and specifically the surrounding text) as focusing on the difference between the wise and the foolish (as in Chapter 7). Certianly there is discussion of the fool v. the wiseman, but it appears in a political context. I therefore read Chapter 10 as caution to the reader with regard to the material world of men and how to navigate same. It warns the reader how to identify the fool and that there will be times when the land is ruled by the foolish as well as times when the land is ruled by the wise. Kohelet advises, however, that in either case certain fundamentals are certain -- notably that food and drink will continue to be items that bring comfort and joy in the physical world and that money will continue to be useful for political ends. See also 7:12 ("Wisdom is a defense, even as money is a defense").
Back to Pastor Meikle, it would be appropriate to preach that enjoyment of the material world is not necessarily evil, as is often preached in the Christian world. (where "love of money is the root of all evil" is frequently abbreviated to "money is the root of all evil.") Further, that his parishoners should seek a job that makes them happy "for this is the gift of God." (Eccl 5:17-18) Nevertheless, one must be cautious, for wealth can be a trap and an injury to the wealthy (5:12).
Ultimately of course, "Listen to the Lord, and keep his commendments, for this is All of Man." (Ecl: 12:13)
Many thanks for your reply, for indeed it is seen "the words of the wise are gracious."
To indulge in an extended discourse ....
First, the question of money and the broader material world in the role of Judaism. Traditionally in the Torah (and in most of the Nevi'im and Ketubim) material wealth is seen as a reward from God tied to observing commandments. In the Torah in particular, it is a visual sign to the other nations of God's favor. Thus, God provides Abraham great material wealth. Not because Abraham covets it or needs it, but because in this way God shows his favor to Abraham. (Cf. Abimelech and Pichol Gen. 21:22) Similarly, the material welath enjoyed by the People of Israel when they occupy the land of Israel is a sign of divine favor, just as the loss of that material wealth is a sign of Divine wrath. (e.g., Deut: 11:13-17). At the same time, however, social stratification, which produces an apparently unfair distribution of wealth, is also addressed in Judaism. Even in the Torah, we are given various tithes and informed of the duties to the poor and the obligation to observe essential social justice. These are framed in the context of God's love of the poor whose cries will arouse his wrath. (Deut: 15:9). Thus, while wealth and material comfort can properly be seen as signs of Divine favor and, at the same time, a test for the individual, poverty is not necessarily a sign of Divine wrath and duty exists on all Israel to succor the poverty-stricken.
Turning to the specific in Kohelet, the interpretation is difficult because of the long Jewish tradition of simultaneously interpreting each individual verse homelitically while at the same time viewing each verse as having a textual meaning within the context of the text (a "p'shat" or "straightforward" explanaition). Even here the p'shat explanation, however, is influenced by the difficulty of language and the question of the broader interpretation of Kohelet and its mixed views on material wealth and Earthly pleasure. For myself, I hold with those interpretations similar to yours that read Kohelet as not condemning wealth per se, but warning that men are easily decieved by wealth, the quest for wealth, and the consequences of wealth.
The specific verse in question is not easily interpreted. The specific verse is Eccl 10:19. I would not read this chapter (and specifically the surrounding text) as focusing on the difference between the wise and the foolish (as in Chapter 7). Certianly there is discussion of the fool v. the wiseman, but it appears in a political context. I therefore read Chapter 10 as caution to the reader with regard to the material world of men and how to navigate same. It warns the reader how to identify the fool and that there will be times when the land is ruled by the foolish as well as times when the land is ruled by the wise. Kohelet advises, however, that in either case certain fundamentals are certain -- notably that food and drink will continue to be items that bring comfort and joy in the physical world and that money will continue to be useful for political ends. See also 7:12 ("Wisdom is a defense, even as money is a defense").
Back to Pastor Meikle, it would be appropriate to preach that enjoyment of the material world is not necessarily evil, as is often preached in the Christian world. (where "love of money is the root of all evil" is frequently abbreviated to "money is the root of all evil.") Further, that his parishoners should seek a job that makes them happy "for this is the gift of God." (Eccl 5:17-18) Nevertheless, one must be cautious, for wealth can be a trap and an injury to the wealthy (5:12).
Ultimately of course, "Listen to the Lord, and keep his commendments, for this is All of Man." (Ecl: 12:13)
Many thanks for your reply, for indeed it is seen "the words of the wise are gracious."