Solomon s Song of Songs Introduction 1 GOD S ANSWER TO ASCETICISM & HEDONISM The book before us is called in the Hebrew SHIYR (heb 7892) HASHIYRIYM (heb 7892), The Song of Songs; or, An Ode of the Odes: which might be understood, An Ode taken or selected from others of a similar kind; or, An Ode the most excellent of all others; this being an idiom common to the Hebrew language: e.g., the God of gods is the supreme God; the Lord of lords, the supreme Lord; the King of kings, the supreme King; the heaven of heavens, the supreme or highest heaven. It may therefore be designed to express a song of the utmost perfection; one of the best that existed, or had ever been penned. Perhaps the title may have a reference to the other poetical compositions of Solomon, which were no less than one thousand and five {1 Kings 4:32}; and this was considered the most excellent of the whole, and the only one that remains, unless we suppose Solomon, with some of the Jews, to be the author of Psalms 72 and 77: but this cannot be proved. An Old Testament book written in the form of a lyrical love song. Some interpreters believe this song speaks symbolically of the love of God for the nation of Israel. Some believe the song speaks symbolically of the love of Jesus Christ for His church. But others insist it should be interpreted literally as a healthy expression of romantic love between a man and a woman. No matter how the book is interpreted, it is certainly one of the most unusual in the Bible. Its subtitle, the song of songs {1:1}, implies it was the loveliest and best known of all the songs of Solomon. It is the song to end all songs! Structure of the Book. The Song of Songs is a brief book of only eight chapters. But in spite of its brevity, it has a complicated structure that sometimes confuses the reader. Several different characters or personalities have speaking parts within this long lyrical poem. In most translations of the Bible, these speakers change abruptly with no identification to help the reader follow the narrative. But the NKJV clears up this confusion by publishing identification lines within the text. This helps the reader gain a clearer understanding of this beautiful song. The three main parties with speaking parts in this long poem are: (1) the groom, King Solomon; (2) the bride, a woman referred to as the Shulamite {6:13}; and (3) the daughters of Jerusalem {2:7}. These women of Jerusalem may have been royal servants who served as attendants to Solomon's Shulamite bride. In this love song, they serve as a chorus to echo the sentiments of the Shulamite, emphasizing her love and affection for Solomon. In addition to these main personalities, the brothers of the Shulamite bride are also mentioned in the poem <8:8-9>. These may have been her step-brothers. The poem indicates she worked under their command as the keeper of the vineyards {1:6}. This beautiful love song falls naturally into two major sections of about equal length-- the beginning of love <chaps. 1--4> and the broadening of love <chaps. 5--8>. 1 Material largely taken from Adam Clarke s commentary on Song of Songs and Nelson s Bible Dictionary. Outline from Nelson s Bible Dictionary. 1 Copyright 2001 Klaus Schiessel
I. The Beginning of Love 1:1-5:1 A. Falling in Love 1:1-3:5 1. Bride's Longing for Affection 1:1-8 2. Expressions of Mutual Love 1:9-17 3. Bride s Desire to be Near Her Lover 2:1-7 3. Visit of the Groom to the Bride's Home 2:8-17 4. Bride's Dream of Separation 3:1-5 B. United in Love 3:6-5:1 1. Wedding Procession 3:6-11 2. Bride's Beauty Is Praised 4:1-15 3. The Marriage Is Consummated 4:16-5:1 II. Broadening of Love 5:2-8:14 A. Struggling in Love 5:2-7:10 1. Bride's Second Dream of Separation 5:2-7 2. Bridegroom's Handsomeness Is Praised 5:8-6:3 3. Bride's Beauty Is Praised 6:4-7:10 B. Growing in Love 7:11-8:14 1. Bride's Desire to Visit Her Home 7:11-8:4 2. Journey and Homecoming 8:5-14 Authorship and Date. Traditionally, authorship of the Song of Songs has been assigned to Solomon {whose name means Peaceful }, since the book itself makes this claim <1:1>. But some scholars reject this theory. They insist it was a later collection of songs attributed to Solomon because of his reputation as a writer of 3000 proverbs and 1005 songs {1 Kings 4:32}. A careful analysis of the internal evidence, however, gives strong support to the view that Solomon wrote the book. Solomon is mentioned by name several times in the Song <1:1,5; 3:7,9, 11; 8:11-12>, and he is specifically identified as the groom. The book also gives evidence of wealth, luxury, and exotic imported goods <3:6-11> a characteristic of his administration {Ecclesiastes 2:1-10}. Additionally, Solomon seems to have had a lot of wisdom in regards to moral and immoral sexual relationships. See Proverbs 5:1-23; 6:20-35. However, with all that wisdom, he still fell into temptation and sin with women {1 Kings 11:1-8} which should be a lesson for all of us {refer to 1 Corinthians 10:11-14; Galatians 6:1-5; Ephesians 5:28-33; 1 Peter 3:1-12; Hebrews 2:1-3}. 2 Copyright 2001 Klaus Schiessel
The groom of the song also assures the Shulamite 2 bride that she is the only one {6:9} among his sixty queens and eighty concubines {6:8}-- probably a reference by Solomon to his royal harem. At the height of his power and influence, Solomon was known to have 700 wives and 300 concubines {1 Kings 11:3}. Some Bible scholars believe the Shulamite was the daughter of Pharaoh mentioned in 1 Kings 7:8, but see note (2). There have been some doubts concerning the author of this book. Some of the rabbis supposed it to be the work of the prophet Isaiah; but this sentiment never gained much credit. Most have, without hesitation, attributed it to Solomon, whose name it bears; and if the book of Ecclesiastes be his, this will follow in course, as the style is exactly the same, allowing for the difference of the subject. Both books seem to have been written about the same time, and to have had the same author. This book, if written by Solomon, could not have been written in his old age, for we find that long before Solomon's old age he had three hundred wives, and seven hundred concubines; but at the time this Song was written, Solomon had only sixty wives and eighty concubines. And the Song most certainly celebrates a marriage. This strong internal evidence clearly supports the traditional view that Solomon himself wrote this song that bears his name. It must have been written early in his reign, probably about 965-960 B. C. Historical Setting. With his large harem, how could King Solomon write such a beautiful love song to one specific wife? At this time Solomon was known to have had 60 wives and 80 concubines {Song 6:8}. Most of his marriages were political arrangements, designed to seal treaties and trade agreements with other nations. Solomon may not even have known all his wives/concubines sexually. In contrast, the Shulamite woman was not a cultured princess but a lowly vineyard keeper whose skin had been darkened by her long exposure to the sun {1:6}. Yet, she was the bride to whom Solomon declared, How much better than wine is your love, and the scent of your perfumes than all spices! {4:10}. It could simply be that of all his wives, he loved this one the most, just as Rachel was preferred over Leah by Jacob. Interpretation: As to its literary genre, the Song of Solomon is obviously a poem of love. The difficulty is how to interpret it. The following are some of the varied interpretations that have been advanced. 1. [Allegorical]. This was the interpretation common among the Jews from ancient times, and from them it has passed over into the Christian Church. The Jews regarded the Song as expressing the love relationship between God and his chosen people. The Christian Church saw in it reflected love between Christ and the Church. Essentially this view has been advocated the early church father Oreigen and more recently by Hengstenberg and Keil. 2 Scholars are not certain of the exact meaning of the phrase, the Shulamite <6:13>, which has come to be used as a title for the bride in this song. No city or region known as Shulam has been identified in Palestine or any of the surrounding territories. Because the poem makes several references to Lebanon <3:9; 4:8,11,15; 5:15; 7:4>, some scholars believe she came from this mountainous territory along the Mediterranean coast in northwestern Palestine. Shulam may be an as yet undiscovered ancient Lebanese city. 3 Copyright 2001 Klaus Schiessel
Other Examples: It is an allegory relative to the conduct of God toward the Hebrews, in bringing them out of Egypt, through the wilderness to the Promised Land. It is intended to represent the incarnation of Jesus Christ, or his marriage with human nature, in reference to its redemption. It represents Christ's love to the church or elected souls, and their love to him. It is an allegorical poem on the glories of Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary. 2. [The Dramatic View]. The essence of this view, as advocated by Franz Delitzsch, is that the Song is a drama representing Solomon as having fallen in love with a rustic girl, the Shulamite, whom he takes to his royal palace in Jerusalem. A particular variation of this view, the [shepherd hypothesis], introduces into the Song a third character, a shepherd, to whom the Shulamite girl remains faithful despite the advances of Solomon. This view reduces the Song to the narration of a dramatic play and assigns the various portions to specified characters. In this viewpoint the Song was written to recount the relationship that developed between them. 3. [The Typical View]. This view, too, holds that in the Song there is portrayed the great love between Christ and the Church, King Solomon being regarded as a type of Christ, and the bride as representing the Church. This view differs from the allegorical in that it tries to do justice to the actual language of the Song without seeking a special meaning in every phrase, as the allegorical view does. Now each of these opinions has its powerful supporters, and each of these has reasons to offer for the support of the opinion which is espoused; and nothing but a direct revelation from God can show us which of these opinions is the correct one, or whether any of them are correct 3. The antiquity of an opinion, if that be not founded on a revelation from God, is no evidence of its truth; for there are many ungodly opinions which are more than a thousand years old. And as to great men and great names, we find them enrolled and arranged on each side of all controversies. It may be asked, What do Christ and his apostles say of it? If Jesus Christ or any of his apostles had referred to it as an allegory, and told us the subject which it pointed out, the matter would have been plain: we should then have had data, and had only to proceed in the way of elucidation. But we find nothing of this in the New Testament. If they had referred to it as an allegory, without intimating the meaning, then we should be justified in searching everywhere for that meaning; and conjecture itself would have been legal, till we had arrived at some self-testifying issue. 3 The following arguments against the allegorical view are taken from Adam Clarke s commentary. 4 Copyright 2001 Klaus Schiessel
If they had referred to it at all, in connection with spiritual subjects, then we should have at once seen that it was to be spiritually understood; and, comparing spiritual things with spiritual, we must have humbly sought for its spiritual interpretation. Had God been introduced, or referred to in any of his essential attributes, or by any of the names which he has been pleased to assume in his revelations to men, we should have then seen that the writer was a spiritual man, and wrote probably in reference to a spiritual end; and, that we should pass by or through his letter, in order to get to the spirit concealed under it. But none of these things appear in this book: the name of God is not found in it; nor is it quoted in the New Testament. As to certain references which its allegorical expositors suppose are made to it, either in the Gospels, Epistles, or Apocalypse, they are not express, and do not, by anything in or connected with them, appear unequivocally to point out this book. And after all that has been said, I am fully of opinion it is not once referred to in the New Testament. But this is no proof of its not being canonical, as there are other books, on which there is no doubt, that are in the same predicament. Were this mode of interpretation to be applied to the Scriptures in general, (and why not, if legitimate here?) in what a state would religion soon be! Who could see anything certain, determinate, and fixed in the meaning of the divine oracles, when fancy and imagination must be the standard interpreters? God has not left his word to man's will in this way. But still, if it refer so distinctly to Christ and his church, as some suppose, it certainly would not have been passed over by both evangelists and apostles without pointed and special notice; and particularly if it points out the love of Christ to his church, and the whole economy of God's working in reference to the salvation of the souls of men. Every attempt, however well-intentioned, to revive this thriftless, not to say dangerous, method of seducing the Scriptures to particular creeds and purposes, should be regarded with jealousy; and nothing received as the doctrine of the Lord but what may be derived from those plain words of the Most High which lie most on a level with the capacities of mankind. Allegory, metaphor, and figures in general, where the design is clearly indicated, which is the case with all those employed by the sacred writers, may come in to illustrate and more forcibly to apply divine truth; but to extort celestial meanings from a whole book, where no such indication is given, is most certainly not the way to arrive at the knowledge of the true God, and of Jesus Christ whom he has sent. From all this it will appear to the intelligent reader, that the spiritual meaning of this book cannot easily be made out: a.) Because we do not know that it is an allegory. b.) If one, the principles on which such allegory is to be explained do nowhere appear. 4. [The Natural Or Literal View]. The basic tenet of this view is that the Song is a poem extolling human love. From that point on, because of the inclusion of this book in the canon of Scripture, adherents of this view may differ widely as to the ultimate significance of this song of love. This commentary is construed on the assumption that the natural view is correct. 5 Copyright 2001 Klaus Schiessel
Taking the natural or literal approach, the canonical significance of the Song of Songs may be stated as follows. (a) The book is called the song of songs, and understandably so. This is a song which Adam could have sung in Paradise when the Lord in His wise providence led Eve to him to be his wife. In frank but pure language the book praises the mutual love between husband and wife, and thereby teaches us not to despise physical beauty and married love as being of a low order. Since these are gifts from the Creator to his creatures (cf. <James 1:17>), they are good and perfect in their place and for their purpose. The book presents a strong warning against an unbiblical dualism which holds the physical and material in lower regard than the spiritual, and which exalts the unmarried state as more virtuous than the state of holy, or sanctified, matrimony. {See 1 Timothy 4:1-5; Hebrews 13:4}. (b) As the counterpart of ([a]), the Song instructs us that God created us male and female. He made the first woman, Eve, and brought her to the first man, Adam, upon which catching the first sight of her exclaimed; This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. The Song of Songs elevates the joys and pleasures of sexual intimacy in the confines of marriage exactly the way God designed it. It provides a lofty picture of both physical and emotional love on a level equaled in no other writings. Nowhere does the description even border on what might be considered lewd and licentious. Thus the Song holds before us the ideal love relationship in marriage 4. The reading of this book, far from raising sensuous thoughts in our minds, should lead us to praise the Creator who created man in His own image, who made the human body beautiful, who awoke in Adam the longing for a companion like himself yet different, and who led the first bride the very climax of the works of creation to her admiring bridegroom. The reading of this book should also make us aware of our sinful failures in our attitude toward members of the other sex in general, and in particular our sins of the flesh within marriage. Thus it is that by this book the Holy Spirit will lead sinners to the Christ who is also the Redeemer and Sanctifier of holy wedlock 5. Seeing and experiencing the purity and holiness of this earthly bond of love will also lead us to better understanding of that love relationship which is heavenly and eternal, namely, the spotlessly pure and indestructible bond of love that exists between Christ and his Church. (from Wycliffe Commentary) It is much better, therefore, if explained or illustrated at all, to take it in its literal meaning, and explain it in its general sense. I say general sense, because there are many passages in it which should not be explained, if taken literally, the references being too delicate; and Eastern phraseology on such subjects is too vivid for European imaginations. Let any sensible and pious medical man read over this book, and, if at all acquainted with 4 The Apostle Paul uses marriage to illustrate the nature of the love between Christ and His Church (Ephesians 5:28-33), but certainly not every marriage reflects this bond of intimate love. 5 Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge. {Hebrews 13:4}. 6 Copyright 2001 Klaus Schiessel
Asiatic phraseology, say whether it would be proper, even in medical language, to explain all the descriptions and allusions in this poem. As the Jewish marriages were celebrated for seven days, it has been often observed that this Song divides itself into seven periods, and describes the transactions of each. I. The FIRST chapter represents the bridegroom and bride as a shepherd and shepherdess. The bride asks her spouse where he takes his flock at noon, to preserve them from the excessive heat, lest she, in seeking him, should go astray into some strange pastures. After this day, the first night succeeds, which is pointed out Song 2:4,5,6. The bridegroom rises early in the morning, leaves the bride asleep, and goes hastily to the fields to his necessary occupations, Cant. 2:7. II. The SECOND night is pointed out Song 2:8,9, etc. The bridegroom comes to the window of his spouse. She opens it, and he enters; and on the morrow, he returns to the fields to his flocks, Song 2:17. III. The THIRD night, the bridegroom having delayed his coming, the bride, being uneasy, arises from her bed, and goes out and inquires of the guards of the city, whether they had seen her beloved. She had not gone far from them till she met with him; she conducts him to her apartment, Song 3:1-4. Very early in the morning, he retires to the country, leaving the bride asleep, Song 3:5. Afterward she arises, and goes also to the fields, Song 3:6. IV. The FOURTH chapter is an eulogium on the bride's beauty; and seems to be a conversation between the parties in the country. She invites the bridegroom to visit her, Song 5:1. He leaves his friends, with whom he was feasting, and comes to the door of his spouse, Song. 5:2. She hesitating to let him in, he withdraws and goes to his garden. The bride follows; but, not knowing whither he had retired, asks the guards of the city, by whom she is maltreated; thence goes to the daughters of Jerusalem, and inquires of them, Song. 5:3, etc. At last she meets with him, Song 6:1, etc., and having spent some time with him, returns. Song. 6:9, points out the FOURTH night of the marriage. V. The FIFTH night is pointed out Song. 7:1, etc. The bridegroom gives his bride nearly the same praise and commendations which he had received from her in the preceding chapters; and early in the morning they go out together to the fields, Song. 7:11-13. VI. The SIXTH night they pass at a village in the country, at the house of a person who is termed the bride's mother, Song. 7:13; 8:1-3. She invites her spouse thither, and promises to regale him with excellent fruits and choice wine; and early in the morning the bridegroom arises, leaves the bride asleep as formerly, and retires to the country, Song. 8:4. VII. The SEVENTH night is passed in the gardens. From Song. 8:5, we have a series of dialogues between the bride and bridegroom. In the morning the bridegroom, having perceived that they were overheard, begs the bride to permit him to retire. She assents, Song. 8:13,14, and exhorts him to make haste, and be like a roe or a young hart on the mountains of spices. 7 Copyright 2001 Klaus Schiessel