March 28, 2011 Existentialism in Ecclesiastes

The existentialist and the Christian lead two distinct, separate lives. They each have their own separate morals, their own way of viewing life in general, and their own purpose for leading the life they do. In the book of Ecclesiastes, though, it seems that its teaching somewhat follow existentialism tendencies, such as the ones taught by Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre. Existentialism is the complex philosophy emphasizing the absurdity of reality and the human responsibility to make choices and accept consequences. To an existentialist, life has no meaning and no purpose and there is supposedly no rational reason for human existence in the first place. They also recognize that with their choices comes its consequences, which they understand and accept though they may not always think ahead to them but not in an ignorant way but rather in way that shows that they saw no harm in making the choice in the first place and there was not a reason not to go through with it anyways. The main theme of Ecclesiastes is that everything is meaningless. Meaningless! Meaningless! says the Teacher. Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless, which can easily come off as having an existentialist point of view (Ecclesiastes 1:2). It then goes on to point out that wisdom, pleasures, toil, advancement, and riches, among other earthly things, are pointless and futile. The writer tries to get across the same fact that it is absurd for life on earth to hold great meaning and purpose just like an existentialist would say. Saying that solely the idea of meaningless is Ecclesiastes theme would be inaccurate when in actuality it is really just the surface story. Along with the theme of meaningless comes the reason why life would be so, which is unlike the philosophy of existentialism because it says life
Comment [L6]: Replace with a synonym for meaningless, this wording may be confusing for readers Comment [L5]: Reword to the idea of meaningless is Ecclesiastes sole theme to make it sound better Comment [L4]: This sentence would flow better if it was punctuated in a way to make it into two sentences. It would then be easier to pinpoint the numerous amounts of information that have been shoved into one sentence. Comment [L1]: Could teaching be replaced with teachings? Comment [L2]: Replace with follows Comment [L3]: Passable thesis statement, states an argument but fails to claim authority and answer the questions how? and so what?

is meaningless just because, with no solid reason but that it just is, no questions asked. Certainly, though, Ecclesiastes is trying to say life without God has no purpose and is meaningless. For without [God], who can eat or find enjoyment? proving we need God in order to find satisfaction in life (Ecclesiastes 2:25). Unlike the existentialist, Christians can find reason to live and even enjoy it and not just go through life day to day and only satisfy lifes simple necessities. Ecclesiastes 11:8 states, However many years a man may live, let him enjoy them all. But let him remember the days of darkness, for they will be many. Everything to come is meaningless. Along with that thought, Christians realize that they have to focus on what is importantliving their lives out of thanks and love for God and focused on their spiritual livesbecause even though they may enjoy earthly pleasures, they will not last and have no worth in the end. The book ends, Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil, teaching that one must not only obey God and keep close to his Word but also trust in him in all that one does. Once one fully reads into the whole meaning and understands the true theme of Ecclesiastes, they can see that in does not actually fully follow existential teachings. On the other hand, it does tend to have a despairing tone. It uses this tone to stress the importance and seriousness of not regarding earthly pleasures too highly but instead focusing on what does matter in life God and what he has done for everyone. However, the choices they make are not always what one normally would deem as wise. In The Stranger, Meursault makes a few choices that would seem to have immoral reasoning behind his actions when in reality he is just seemingly living in the moment with no regard to his or others past of futures. He satisfies any needs he has and is shut off from the world around him,

Comment [L7]: Avoid clich statements

Comment [L8]: While some of these excerpts certainly could have been expanded upon even more, the analysis provided for each passage aptly describes the text at hand and the purpose that can be derived from it Comment [L9]: Replace with it Comment [L10]: Specify how it does so Comment [L11]: How does it have this despairing tone? Needs to be expanded on

Comment [L12]: Who are they? Comment [L13]: Remove this word Comment [L14]: A reader unfamiliar with the novel might not know who Meursault is so it would be helpful if it was clarified that he is in fact the character in the book Comment [L15]: This paragraph could use some textual evidence

rather being a detached observer then an active participant. Since he has a lack of morals, some of his decisions gave off the impression that he was immoral, but rather he just went though with some situations, like writing the letter for Raymond and agreeing to marry Marie if she wanted to, because he saw no reason not to and did not even care about the outcome anyways.

Comment [L16]: Odd sounding phrasing, could be replaced with something like, acting as Comment [L17]: Replace with than Comment [L18]: Keep a constant verb tense throughout the paper, this sentence switches from present tense to past tense Comment [L19]: Replace with through Comment [L20]: Paragraph lacks