Did Solomon actually write this song? (1:1)
People have debated King Solomon’s relationship to this poem for centuries. Some say he wrote it (1Ki 4:32). Others say it was written about him. Still others say the poem may have been “his” simply in the sense that it was a literary work dedicated to him as a wedding gift.
Why is a poem about romance and sex in the Bible? (1:2)
We might just as well ask why not. After all, God created sex. Romance was his idea. The fact that sin has distorted sex should not make us forget that sexual intimacy is God’s gift to us—to be enjoyed when it is used as he intends.
Who are these young women? (1:3)
The word love used here does not necessarily imply that these young women were his lovers; young women could also be translated virgins (see Isa 7:14). Perhaps the young woman was expressing her beloved’s appeal and her joy that she was the one who had won his heart.
Does this describe a love affair? (1:4)
The references to the king, the daughters of Jerusalem, the queens, the concubines and the virgins seem to suggest that this is the story of a maiden’s love affair with King Solomon. Some think Solomon wrote the Song in his youth, before he acquired his extensive harem (1Ki 11:3; see Introduction: Who wrote this book?).
Others say the Song reflects the love between a young Israelite shepherd and his bride, a maiden from the hill country of northern Israel. According to this view, the two lovers were simply fantasizing—using images of royalty to enhance their affection for each other. To the chaste and beautiful bride, her beloved was the royal monarch in all his majesty, surrounded by his troops and riding in his upholstered carriage (3:6–11). This was her man, her king (1:4), her Solomon (3:7). The young shepherd responded by describing his bride as a prince’s daughter (7:1), unique among the many queens who praised her (6:9). This is the exaggerated language of love, with lavish images from the privacy and passion of the bedroom.
Still others, uncomfortable about the Song’s graphic sexual imagery, dismiss both possibilities and call it an allegory of God’s love for Israel. They insist that early rabbis would never have accepted the book as anything but allegory because of the prominence and dignity it gives to the woman.
Regardless of one’s interpretation, Song of Songs is a timeless expression of the joy and intimacy of love, the gift of our Creator. See Introduction: Why read this book?.
Who are the Friends in the headings? (1:4)
The Friends are the “we” speakers who seem to be speaking about the couple from the side. It is possible, however, that the “we” speaker is still the woman as she shifts her focus from speech about her beloved to speech about herself.
What was distinctive about the tents of Kedar? (1:5)
Kedar was an area in the Arabian Desert known for its flocks. Bedouin tents were commonly made of black goat skins.
Why didn’t she want her beloved to stare at her? (1:6)
The young woman was pretty—Dark am I, yet lovely (v. 5)—but she felt self-conscious about her position in society. The girls with darker skin were those who had to work out in the sun, in the fields or vineyards. More privileged girls could be recognized by their lighter complexions.
What does it mean that she has neglected her own vineyard? (1:6)
Because she spent her time caring for the family vineyard, she neglected her personal appearance, which is described poetically as her own vineyard.
What was wrong with wearing a veil? (1:7)
Some suggest that prostitutes wearing veils wandered from flock to flock, looking for shepherds willing to buy their services (Ge 38:15). A young woman committed to the love of one man would not want to be mistaken for a loose, wandering woman, so she asked her shepherd lover where she could readily find him while he watched his sheep.
Was being compared to a horse a compliment? (1:9)
Pharaoh’s horses were among the finest creatures in the ancient world, surpassing camels and donkeys. A mare in Pharaoh’s stable was decorated with fine jewels and gold chains. The man was paying his bride the highest compliment. She, like Pharaoh’s mare, would be adorned with precious jewels and admired by all.
What was special about myrrh? (1:13)
In this sensuous metaphor, the woman was comparing her beloved to a sweet-smelling ointment used by people of royal rank to scent their wedding robes (Ps 45:8). People also used myrrh as an enticing perfume. In her view, her lover took the place of perfume.
How could henna blossoms remind one of a person? (1:14)
Arab women used henna blossoms for perfume, underarm deodorant and hair dye. Perfumes also heightened the sense of pleasure shared by the lovers. They would have associated these scents with their passionate love for each other.
What do beams and rafters have to do with love? (1:17)
Cedar beams and fir rafters suggest a regal or luxurious setting. Wood was scarce in Israel, and cedar and fir were expensive imports. Their use in a house implied wealth, and their agreeable aroma heightened the sense of pleasure.
What’s the plot to this story? (2:1)
Song of Songs is a description of love. Since poets are not bound to follow a chronological sequence of events, the Song, although disjointed at times, may still reflect a single, unified plot. Some, however, see uneven transitions in this poetry as evidence that it is really a collection of several love poems with no discernible plot.
What does the Bible say about sex? (2:3–7)
The Bible has a lot to say about sex. In fact, God’s creation of sex is recorded at the very beginning of his written Word, and God’s first instruction to humankind was to have sex: Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it (Ge 1:28). No one who studies the Bible can say that it is prudish about sexuality. Song of Songs is such a steamy account of sexual love that Jewish boys were forbidden to read it until they were 14 years old!
However, as our creator, God knew that people needed committed love to protect them. He knew that outside of a God-ordained marriage, sex can cause many emotional, physical and spiritual problems. The Bible says: Can a man scoop fire into his lap without his clothes being burned? Can a man walk on hot coals without his feet being scorched? So is he who sleeps with another man’s wife; no one who touches her will go unpunished (Pr 6:27–29).
This instruction isn’t just for adultery. In fact, any sexual relationship outside of marriage is outside of God’s good plan for us. Sex was meant to be the intimate bond that holds a marriage together, as Jesus noted in Mark 10: For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh (vv. 7–8). Paul said that we are to honor God with our bodies (1Co 6:20). That means sex is essential between a husband and wife (1Co 7:3–5) but prohibited under any other circumstance. All people should flee from sexual immorality (1Co 6:18).
Were these two people married or simply lovers? (2:3)
The depth of intimacy suggests that the two lovers knew each other well and that they enjoyed their intimacy within the security of a marital relationship. A book describing such intimacy outside the marital relationship would likely not have been included in the Scriptures.
Who were these daughters of Jerusalem? (2:7; see 1:5; 3:5, 10; 5:8, 16; 8:4)
The poet created a literary device to highlight the admirable qualities of the two lovers. The bride spoke to others, possibly those in King Solomon’s harem or the privileged ladies of the court. She instructed them in the way of true love, telling them that sexual intimacy cannot be forced. Love and lust are not the same. Many think the repetition of these words throughout the Song provides evidence of the poem’s fundamental unity.
What do foxes have to do with romance? (2:15)
Little foxes apparently attacked and destroyed the blossoming vines. The man’s warning was that little things (such as perfectionism or jealousy) can creep into a beautiful marriage relationship, gnawing at it until the love vine lies in ruins. He wanted those little things caught and stopped before serious damage was done.
How does one browse among the lilies? (2:16)
The lilies in the garden refer to the charms of the young woman (v. 2). The young man is compared to a gazelle (v. 17) who, in a leisurely way, is free to enjoy her delicacies (see also 6:3).
Why did she pursue him so aggressively? (3:2, 4)
In a culture in which parents typically arranged marriage contracts, romantic feelings seldom entered into the negotiations. Those emotions usually came later, after the marriage was consummated. Prior to that, neither the woman nor the man pursued the other. These verses may describe the desires of two people already married and deeply in love. Or they could recall a dream in which the woman longs for her marriage to be consummated; if so, the poetry reveals her private desires. See Could these verses describe a dream? (5:2–8).
Why go to the room of the one who conceived her? (3:4)
This may have been connected with their marriage ceremony. Bringing her future husband to her mother’s home would have demonstrated the purity of their love. In 8:5 they returned to the home of the bride’s mother, which perhaps indicates that the wedding festivities had ended and their married life together had begun. In 8:6–7 the bride paid tribute to love in a faithful marriage.
Why was the carriage escorted by warriors? (3:7–8)
This was meant to display the great luxuriousness of Solomon’s travel. He was accompanied by a great cohort of warriors from noble birth who were trained and ready for battle, day or night. This cohort displayed the grandeur and might of Solomon’s kingship.
Many who have studied this text think Solomon was the beloved. Others think Solomon was probably too busy with his royal duties to engage in a pastoral romance with a country peasant. In that case, the King Solomon in this verse may have been a commoner who was “king for a day” at his wedding feast.
Were these compliments? (4:1–4)
What woman would want to be compared to sheep, goats and pomegranates? These images do not typically appeal to our contemporary senses because we are so far removed from the simple country beauty from which these images were drawn. But people of an earlier time and from a more rural setting considered these images attractive. For example, a flock of goats streaming down a hillside at sunset looks curiously like a woman’s long, flowing hair.
How was her neck like the tower of David? (4:4)
The image was meant to convey grace, strength and dignity. Scholars are not certain what tower of David was being referred to here.
What was special about myrrh? (4:6)
Myrrh was a sweet-smelling ointment used by people of royal rank to scent their wedding robes (Ps 45:8). It was also used as an enticing perfume. In the man’s view, his bride took the place of perfume.
Where are the Amana and Hermon mountains? (4:8)
These are summits in a range of mountains north of Israel. (Senir is another name for Mount Hermon.) The poet gave local color to his work, just as modern songwriters might include a certain city in a song. The bride seems to have lived with her family among the vineyards of northern Israel.
Why would a man call his bride his sister? (4:9)
It was common for lovers to address each other as “brother” and “sister” in the love poetry of the ancient Near East.
Why say someone’s clothing smells like a country? (4:11)
The lovers were thinking of the delightful scent of Lebanon’s cedars as the sun in the mountain air warmed them. They were also thinking of flowers blooming in mountain and valley gardens. Lebanon was verdant and rich with flowers, herbs and scented woods. The lovers stimulated each other with such thoughts.
How was the bride like a locked garden? (4:12)
The man was apparently describing his bride on their wedding night. She was a virgin whose “garden” was about to be unlocked for the first time. Until then she had remained a spring enclosed, a sealed fountain. The consummation of the marriage is beautifully described in 4:16–5:1.
What was the importance of fragrance to ancient Middle Eastern people? (4:13–14)
In a culture of infrequent bathing and poor personal hygiene, fragrance masked the unpleasant odors of people living closely together. After a bath, the pleasant aromas and deep perfumes delighted the senses. In addition, incense counteracted the foul air of villages in which sewage ran openly in the streets and animals moved about freely.
What is being described here? (5:1)
Wedding feasts were gala social events that often lasted for seven days. During that time, the guests took part in celebrating the consummated marriage.
Could these verses describe a dream? (5:2–8)
Yes. The opening words of these verses, I slept but my heart was awake, may be a poetic way to describe a dream. These verses show that the pleasures of marriage do not guarantee there will be no disappointments.
What was the source of her anxiety? (5:3)
Even love stories have conflict. When the honeymoon is over, the thrill of romance can fade if it isn’t nurtured. Verses 2–7 describe an incident—some say a dream—that occurred early in their marriage. For some reason the bride and groom were separated. When he returned, she was so drowsy with sleep she did not respond quickly enough for him. By the time she responded, he had gone. Now it was her turn to seek her beloved.
Why was myrrh on her fingers and the handles of the bolt? (5:5)
The meaning of this verse is not clear. The image is meant to enhance the surrounding descriptions of the sensual environment that awaited her beloved.
Was this a physical attack? (5:7)
Probably not. If this literally described a brutal attack on his wife, he would then have taken a completely different role in this poem—not as a loving husband but as a man seeking to bring justice to those who violated his wife. It is more plausible that verses 2–8 describe incidents from a dream. By the time the watchmen appeared in the dream, it had become a nightmare. See Could these verses describe a dream? (5:2–8).
Why emphasize physical appearance? (5:10–16)
The spotlight on physical beauty throughout the book has caused many to interpret it allegorically. But it does not glorify the flesh at the expense of the spiritual. The Bible teaches here that the body is a work of beauty, a masterpiece of creation. While physical beauty does fade with time (Pr 31:30) and the inward beauty of godly character is to be esteemed for its great worth in God’s sight (1Pe 3:3–6), this passage describes the beloved’s delight in the physique of her handsome lover.
What were these similes supposed to communicate? (5:12–15)
The images collectively denoted the perfection of her beloved’s body. The pupil of the eye, soft like a dove, was surrounded by the milky whiteness of the eye. The cheeks were sweet like perfume, while the lips were like flowers dripping with precious nectar. The arms were ruddy and strong, and his body glistened and was strong like ivory. The picture here is of a perfectly built man.
How would the beloved browse in the gardens? (6:2)
The “garden” refers to the physical charms of the young woman. Her beloved is compared to a gazelle (2:9, 17; 8:14) who, in a leisurely way, is free to enjoy her delicacies (see also v. 3).
Were these compliments? (6:5–7)
What woman would want to be compared to sheep, goats and pomegranates? These images do not typically appeal to our contemporary senses because we are so far removed from the simple country beauty from which these images were drawn. But people of an earlier time and from a more rural setting considered these images attractive. For example, a flock of goats streaming down a hillside at sunset looks curiously like a woman’s long, flowing hair.
Did she have more than 140 competitors? (6:8)
Some believe Solomon wrote this poem when he was still young, before he had 700 foreign wives and 300 concubines (1Ki 11:3). Others think this poem is about a common shepherd and his bride. Those who hold this view believe the comparison to 60 queens and 80 concubines is similar to lovers who might say their love is “one in a million.” They think the young shepherd was boasting that his bride was more desirable than the members of a royal household.
Why take a chariot ride? (6:12)
People disagree about who is speaking in these verses. If it is the bride, it may be that she was carried off in chariots, which would fit well with verse 13. However, this might describe her fantasy: after wandering into the vineyards to see the new growth, she rode off in a royal chariot with her “prince charming.” If it is the groom speaking about his desire, the chariots may symbolize his racing heartbeat.
Who was the Shulammite? (6:13)
The meaning of this word is unclear. Some say it was the name of the young bride. Others say it is a variant of Shunammite and tells us only that she came from Shunem, a village near Jezreel. Still others maintain Shulammite is a feminine form of Solomon, meaning a woman belonging to Solomon.
What was the dance of Mahanaim? (6:13)
Wedding festivals were filled with music and dancing. It was typical for the guests to watch the bride, the center of attention, as she danced in celebration. Some think this dance was part of the bride’s fantasy and that her husband had now joined in the fantasy. If so, then the bride danced for him, and he described her graceful figure (7:1–9).
Was the bride a daughter of a prince? (7:1)
Some think she was a maiden engaged to marry a king (Ps 45:13–15). Others see the Song of Songs as a poem filled with romantic fantasy; here, then, the groom called his bride a princess even though she was merely a rustic girl. See the article Does this describe a love affair? (1:4).
What was so appealing about these comparisons? (7:2–9)
Such comparisons may sound odd to us, but they were full of meaning to the ancient writer and readers of this book. If we were more familiar with the physical environment referred to in this song, we might more readily appreciate the imagery. Was there an elegance to the tower of Lebanon (v. 4)? Were newborn fawns of a gazelle (v. 3) especially soft and warm? Did the pools of Heshbon (v. 4) reflect a dark, mysterious beauty? Such questions may help us appreciate why the writer selected these specific images.
Does this describe sexual intercourse? (7:8–9)
Yes, though in imaginative, poetic language rather than technical terms.
What was the significance of mandrakes? (7:13)
Mandrake plants (which sprout forked roots that resemble the lower part of a human body) have been used for centuries as ingredients in love potions and aphrodisiacs (Ge 30:14–16); they are also associated with fertility. This verse refers to their aroma, which was stimulating.
Couldn’t a woman kiss her husband in public? (8:1)
Apparently not in that culture. Kissing in public, except among members of one’s own family, is still considered inappropriate in many parts of the world.
What kind of spiced wine was this? (8:2)
Pomegranates yield a refreshing juice that the bride offered to her beloved. It is not clear whether this nectar was an intoxicating beverage (which the Hebrew word for nectar may refer to) or whether the word implies something more. Some think the context suggests some kind of sensual image, perhaps that he would become drunk with her love.
How could she seal her husband’s heart? (8:6)
Seals were precious to their owners; they were as personal as their names. The bride wanted to be placed like a seal over her husband’s heart and on his arm. The seal mentioned here probably was a small cylinder seal used to sign clay documents by rolling them over the clay. The owner wore it around his neck on a cord threaded through a hole drilled lengthwise through it. The image suggests sexual fidelity, since jealousy is mentioned. The seal communicated the message: My beloved is mine and I am his (2:16).
Why compare a sister to a wall? (8:9)
The wall suggests purity—shutting out sexual temptation. The door, on the other hand, suggests openness and vulnerability—implying someone needing protection. The bride affirmed that she had been faithful—a strong wall—open only to her beloved (v. 10).
Who tended the bride’s fruit? (8:12)
One plausible explanation is that the bride compared her figurative vineyard (her body and her love) to Solomon’s real vineyards. He rented his vineyards to tenants who paid him with its fruit, keeping 20 percent for themselves. But her vineyard was priceless by comparison, and she was not for sale. Instead she gave herself freely to her husband.