Notwithstanding
being rather conservative, Glenn L. Pearson, in a book he wrote on the Old
Testament for a Latter-day Saint audience admitted that the evidence against Solomon being the author of
Ecclesiastes is very strong:
Ecclesiastes
The name of this book is a transliteration of
a Greek translation of the Hebrew word koheleth,
which signifies one who calls a meeting. From this comes the reference to the
work as “the preacher.” The koheleth refers
to himself in Ecclesiastes 1:1 as the “son of David, king in Jerusalem,” and
from this many have concluded that this is another work of Solomon. This title
could refer to any royal descendant of David, however. Also, the linguistic
evidence does not support Solomon’s authorship. Also, the linguistic evidence
does not support Solomon’s authorship, since the Hebrew is reflective of a
later stage of development that seems to date the book after his time. (Glenn
L. Pearson, The Old Testament: A Mormon
Perspective [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1980], 53)
On the topic
of the Song of Solomon, while rejecting that it was inspired from God, does not
go as far as McConkie and some others have, and instead, (correctly) noted that
the book contains very beautiful poetry (I would urge anyone who can to read it
in the Hebrew):
Song of Solomon
This book in the Hebrew is called “Song of
Songs,” a phrase which denotes a song selected above others because of its
excellence. Actually, it is not a song but an ode containing many beautiful
phrases and much lyrical prose. Though its authorship is ascribed to Solomon,
its linguistic style is exactly the same as Ecclesiastes, pointing to a late
date of composition. The right of this book to be a part of the sacred
literature has been questioned by both Jews and Christians. It has retained its
place on the argument that it is an allegory setting forth the love of God for
Israel or of Christ for his church. (Ibid., 54)