ABSTRACT
This chapter describes some readings more than others—the Midrash, Gregory of Nyssa, Jerome—because in all honesty they were richer than other readings; their multivalence matched that of Ecclesiastes itself. The scholars listed in the quote by Christianson all seek a single, unified voice in Ecclesiastes that can be placed in recognizable descriptive labels, part of a larger intellectual taxonomy with multiple examples for each category. In this regard it is descriptive, but not merely descriptive. The descriptive power of reception history is focused on the text, isolating some of the strands of its polyvalence. Reception history is an engagement with the Hebrew Bible that is nothing less than a reconception of biblical scholarship. Academic treatments of Ecclesiastes problematize differences between Qohelet's theological views and those in the rest of the Hebrew Bible, as did the rabbis. Qohelet's expressions of despair or exhortations to pleasure are as much moral problems in need of solutions for historical critics.
