Discovering Song of Songs

Also called “Song of Solomon,” stands out because of its unusual and generally awkward, uncomfortable material. Despite its longstanding acceptance and place in the Old Testament (OT) scriptures, believers tend to be somewhat insecure and uncertain about how to read and understand it, as well as about discussing and studying it publicly. Despite the awkwardness that this book inspires, history indicates as late as the eighth century A.D., that this book has been read on the eighth day of Jewish Passover observance to celebrate God’s love for the nation of Israel. So, what is the purpose and message of this book?

Background Information

Though modern scholars have suggested a variety of other alternatives, the longstanding historical consensus has been that King Solomon authored this book. Song of Songs 1:1 introduces Solomon as the author, and he is referred to by name six other times throughout the book (Song of Songs 1:5; 3:7, 9, 11; 8:11-12).

Solomon’s skill in at writing poetry and as an insightful observer of nature, esp. the flora and fauna of Israel, matches well the kind of vocabulary, statements, and style which run throughout the book. What’s more, as Jewish scholar Benjamin Segal observes, “the atmosphere of luxury and wealth in the song agrees better with the Solomonic period than with any other.”

Some will counter Solomon as author by claiming that Solomon’s many marriages and wives disqualify him from being an exemplary, faithful lover and husband since we know that he married 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3). We may resolve this seeming dilemma, though, by acknowledging that just as Solomon began as an exemplary figure of wisdom but drifted afield in this regard, so he also began as an exemplary lover and husband but drifted afield in this regard as well. If this is the case, then the relationship portrayed in this book would likely pertain to his first wife before he entangled himself in politics and polygamy.

Purpose of the Book

What is the purpose of this book? People have proposed a variety of answers, with proposals that include: (1) an allegory, (2) a romantic drama, (3) a historical relationship, and (4) a love sonnet.

An Allegory
Many have viewed this book as an allegory in which the details and descriptions, though imaginary, represent something other than what is written, just as the fictional people, scenes, and events in Pilgrim’s Progress represent something other than what they are. Proposed allegorical frameworks include: (1) God’s love for Israel (a typical Jewish view), (2) Christ’s love for the church (a common Christian view), and (3) God’s relationship with the virgin Mary (a Catholic view). Of these proposals, (3) is the most problematic, while (1) and (2) at least reflect some biblical literacy, concepts, and perspective.

After all, God does have a loving, covenantal relationship with Israel akin to marriage (Isa 54:5-8, et al.) and Christ does have a loving relationship with the church resembling marriage, as well (Eph 5:23-25, 32). Despite these facts, the NT never refers to the Song of Songs in this way, neither does the Song of Songs ever refer to any relationship either between God and Israel or Christ and the church. To accept either of these interpretations can be no more than guesswork or speculation. What’s more, the NT never refers to the Song of Songs at all.

Additionally, if this book is an allegory, then deciphering what its various details represent (Solomon, the Shulamite woman, their behaviors, their descriptions, the events, etc.) becomes an even further conundrum since doing so is purely subjective, with countless possible interpretations. Finally, this book lacks key elements of allegorical writing and allegorical writing doesn’t generally employ the names of actual historical people and locations, as this book does. With all of this in mind, it is safe to say that this book is probably not an allegory.

A Fictional Romantic Drama
According to this view, this book was not written by Solomon but by someone else later in history, who simply chose Solomon as the main character due to his prominence and prestige. As such, the purpose would be to present the challenges and normalcy of romantic love.

A Love Sonnet
An idealization of an imaginary romantic relationship, written by Solomon in which he portrays himself, the wise king, as an exemplary lover and husband, even though he isn’t necessarily such a man.

An Actual Historical Relationship
We have already made a case for this interpretation, and this is the most likely origin of this book. Ultimately, however, whether this book portrays an actual, historical relationship that played out between Solomon and his first wife or whether it portrays an idealized romantic relationship imagined and presented by Solomon, the purpose of the book seems to be to uphold the human experience of marital love and romance as appropriate, ideal, and wholesome, while also dismissing the twofold, contrasting but related errors of promiscuous sensuality on the one hand and prudish ascetism on the other.

Besides Song of Songs, Scripture provides clear support for intimacy and romance in marriage (Prov 5:15-20; 1 Cor 7:1-5; Heb 13:4). In these three references, Hebrews affirms it, Proverbs encourages it, and then Paul – in his typical direct and didactic style – basically insists upon it. But what these three passages (and others in various ways) say in measure, the Song of Songs not only acknowledges but celebrates elaborately and poetically.

Outline

The following outline, offered by commentator and OT scholar Dennis Kinlaw, is helpful for understanding the basic structure of this book:

• The Title (1:1)
• The Courtship (1:2–3:5)
• The Bridal Procession (3:6–11)
• The Wedding (4:1–5:1)
• The Life of Love (5:2–8:7)
• The Conclusion (8:8–14)

This basic outline can help you read this book in a purposeful, organized manner. But be warned, it is a dramatic, poetic, and highly descriptive read! But as inspired Scripture from God, it is “profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness,” able to equip and prepare the people of God “for every good work,” including a genuine and meaningful life of romance, intimacy, and relationship through the highs and lows of marital life.

Key Takeaways

We should acknowledge and foster romantic love as a crucial feature of marriage. This means, first, that we should reserve romantic love for marriage while refusing to participate in all other forms of selfish sensuality both before and after marriage. This also means that we should reject the notion that romantic love is somehow inappropriate, inferior, problematic, undesirable, sinful, or worldly.

Romantic love within marriage is a compelling enough reason for marriage, even if a couple is unable to bear children. Though Scripture teaches that bearing children is a key function of and purpose for marriage, romantic love is not a “necessary evil,” merely a means to that end but a meaningful purpose in its own right. God did not create marital intimacy so that we would procreate, but he created marriage so that we might appreciate, experience, and understand the closeness and depth of such an intimate, committed relationship – something no other relationship can provide.

We should observe that the kind of marriage God celebrates is the kind of marriage God created in the beginning, the marriage of a man and a woman. He never intended for marriage to be anything else, whether that be two men, two women, or any other combination of people or other things (Rom 1:26-27ff; 1 Cor 6:9).

We should acknowledge the challenges of marriage. While romantic love within marriage will raise new challenges of communication, expectations, interaction, understanding (or rather misunderstanding), and even selfishness or sin, between spouses, such challenges are not a good reason for avoiding or abandoning such affection, love, and relationship. Instead, a married couple should persevere in love, allowing themselves to draw closer together and more mature through a commitment – among other things – to romantic love. The complications and difficulties of marriage due to sin and the Fall are not a sufficient reason to abandon or avoid this key aspect of the marriage commitment and experience.