Excepting Jesus Christ, the wisest man to ever have lived is Israel’s third king – King Solomon. When we thumb through our Bibles, we come to the writings of Solomon. Tucked away in those writings is a book often neglected. Certainly, we love the Proverbs of Solomon. Here, we have only a portion of Solomon’s expression of his God-given wisdom. Many Bible teachers teach Solomon’s proverbs. Following the Proverbs, we come to the Ecclesiastes of Solomon. Far less popular than his proverbs, the book of Ecclesiastes outlines the vanity of vanities – the greatest of all futilities – life lived “under the sun” with no regard to the God who is “beyond the sun.” Beyond the Ecclesiastes, however, is a much neglected portion of scripture written by the wisest man among the mortals – the Canticles of Solomon. In the opening verse, we read:
The song of songs, which is Solomon’s (Canticles 1:1).
This is in deep contrast to the previous book. In the Ecclesiastes, Solomon gives us the vanity which excels all vanities; in the Canticles, Solomon gives us the song which excels all songs. In our Bible we have a song book containing one hundred fifty psalms. But we have another book which contains the words of a song – Solomon’s song – which Solomon claims to the “song of songs” – the song which exceeds all the others.
Adam Clarke notes that the Jews, in their history, have sung ten notable songs:
- The first was sung by Adam when his sin was pardoned.
- The second was sung by Moses and the Israelites at the Red Sea.
- The third was sung by the Israelites when they drank of the rock in the wilderness.
- The fourth was sung by Moses when summoned to depart from this world.
- The fifth was sung by Joshua when the sun and moon stood still.
- The sixth was sung by Deborah and Barak after the defeat of Sisera.
- The seventh was sung by Hannah when the Lord promised her a son.
- The eighth was sung by David for all the mercies given him by God.
- The ninth is the present, sung in the spirit of prophecy by Solomon.
- The tenth is that which shall be sung by the children of Israel when restored from their captivities.
As great as these songs are, the Song of Solomon excels them all.
The Subject of the Canticles
Some insist that there is no significance whatsoever to Solomon’s Song. The song is simply a piece of poetic literature written from King Solomon to a Shulamite woman who was one of many of Solomon’s objects of love. That the song is addressed to a Shulamite woman is undeniable from the thirteenth verse of the sixth chapter. But is that really the extent of the Holy Spirit’s intent? Did the Holy Spirit inspire the song to be written just so we could read one of Solomon’s love letters to one of his many lovers? The ancient Jews certainly believed there was spiritual significance to the song, as they publicly read it annually on the eighth day of the Passover.
A Literal Meaning
Certainly, the Song of Solomon has a literal implication to it, and like all historical events of the Bible, we should not attempt to discard its literalness. Solomon had many wives and many concubines. But as Jacob loved Rachel more than he loved Leah, Solomon loved one of his lovers above the rest. While we may glean spiritual truth from the Canticles (as all scripture is profitable for doctrine), let us never forget that it was a literal song written by a historical figure to his bride. Always remember that the gleaning of spiritual truth from a passage of scripture does not negate the literal implication of that scripture. For example, we are told in I Corinthians 10 that the Old Testament account of the congregation of Israel in the wilderness was written for our learning and for our admonition. While we compare the Israelites’ daily diet of manna in the wilderness to the “bread of heaven” of which we have partaken, we do not conclude that the manna in the wilderness never occurred. The Israelites literally ate manna from heaven. And what they ate literally is a picture of what we eat spiritually. But we do not conclude that, since the manna from heaven was a picture, it must have never happened literally. To quickly cite another example, Moses hit a rock with his rod, and water gushed out. The children of Israel then drank this water. This is a wonderful picture of how the Rock (Jesus Christ) was smitten at Calvary, and because of His sacrificial death, we can drink of living water. But, since the smiting of the rock in the wilderness represents the suffering of Christ, do we then say that Moses never smote a rock in the wilderness literally? Of course not. The event happened literally, and spiritual truth can (and should) be drawn from it. But it is a violation of honest hermeneutics to deny the literalness of a scriptural event (past, present, or future) on the basis of “spiritualizing” it. While there are many spiritual truths from which we can glean in the Canticles, we do not deny that the song was written by Solomon to a bride whom he loved above the others.
Christ and the Church
Knowing that the Canticles contain a literal aspect, it must be asked whether they contain a spiritual one. Should there be any spiritualization of the song? Can any part of the Canticles refer to a bride other than Solomon’s Shulamite? I answer with an emphatic “MOST CERTAINLY!” Many insist that the Canticles refer, not only to a Shulamite bride of Solomon, but also to the bride of Christ – the church. I believe that such a conclusion is scripturally sound. In Paul’s epistle to the Ephesian church, Paul gives instruction first to husbands in the church, then to their wives. Then, he quotes from the book of Genesis regarding marriage. Notice:
Ephesians 5:31 – “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.”
After Paul quotes this verse from Genesis regarding a man and his wife, he then states that he is speaking of something more than just any man and any wife. Notice:
Ephesians 5:32 – “This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.”
Clearly, any honest student of the Bible can see that Paul is comparing the relationship of a groom and his bride to Christ and His church. Since Solomon’s song is a dialog between a bride and groom, and since the church is the bride of Christ, there is no reason why the song cannot be applied to Christ and His bride, the church.
If we consider attributing the Song of Solomon as being a song from Christ to His church, then we must be honest in asking ourselves the question, “Is this interpretation scripturally sound?” I believe this interpretation is the most scripturally sound of all possible interpretations. Again, I am not denying that the song was originally written to a literal bride of Solomon. But I am affirming that this song can be applied to the bride of Christ - the church - for a number of reasons.
First, this interpretation portrays Solomon as a type of Christ, which is done elsewhere in scripture. Notice a verse relating specifically to the reign of Solomon:
I Kings 4:25 – “And Judah and Israel dwelt safely, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, from Dan even to Beersheba, all the days of Solomon.”
At first glance, you may see no reference to Christ in this verse. But look very carefully – it is stated that Judah and Israel dwelt safely, “every man under his vine and under his fig tree.” The phrase “every man under his vine and under his fig tree” is found in other places in Old Testament prophecy. It is found in Micah 4:4 and Zechariah 3:10. In both instances, the phrase does not refer to Solomon’s reign. We know this because both passages refer to a future kingdom in Israel, and at the time of both Micah and Zechariah, Solomon’s reign was past. It is clear that the prophecies of Micah and Zechariah refer to the coming kingdom of the Messiah upon the earth from His throne in Jerusalem. The picture of Christ’s kingdom is very similar to the picture of Solomon’s reign. Solomon’s kingdom is a great picture of Christ’s coming kingdom upon this earth. Consider:
- Christ, like Solomon, will reign from Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:3; Micah 4:2).
- Christ’s reign, like Solomon’s, will be characterized by peace (Isaiah 2:4; Micah 4:3)
- As people came from all over the world to hear Solomon’s wisdom (I Kings 4:34), people will come from all nations to hear the teaching of Christ Himself in Jerusalem (Isaiah 2:3; Zechariah 8:23)
- As Solomon built the temple in Jerusalem (I Kings 6:1), Christ will build the temple in the Millennium (Zechariah 6:12).
- The phrase “every man under his vine and under his fig tree” refers to both Solomon’s reign (I Kings 4:25) and Christ’s reign (Micah 4:4; Zechariah 3:10).
As for the Song of Solomon, the teaching that Solomon is a type of Christ is supported clearly by other scriptures.
Second, applying the Canticles to a love song between Christ and His church is not only scripturally sound because it portrays Solomon as a type of Christ, but it also portrays the Shulamite woman as the bride of Christ (the church). We have already seen from Ephesians 5 that this is in accordance with the teaching of scripture.
Third, since it is in harmony with scriptural hermeneutics to typify Solomon as Christ and the Shulamite woman as the church, the Canticles would then portray a forgotten message that Christ desires to have an intimate relationship with His church, His bride. Solomon’s Song is a chorus that depicts intimacy (even physical intimacy) between a groom and his bride. Could this be why the song is neglected in both public and private worship? Could the neglect of this book reveal that much of the American church today contains the maturity of giddy schoolchildren?
In Solomon’s Song, we have a description of intimacy between a groom and his bride. Of course, in marriage, this intimacy includes physical intimacy. Please note that I am not teaching some ridiculous doctrine that Christ wants to have sexual intercourse with individuals in His church. But Christ does desire communion, fellowship, and closeness with His church. Could it be that the Canticles are neglected because we are ashamed to admit that we, the American church of today, know so little about communion with Christ and love for Christ? Could that be the reason that this song is so foreign to us? Very few in the church spend any real quality time in the presence of the groom, with a Bible and an altar, enjoying sweet communion with Christ. For many, prayer is simply a ritual where we fulfill a religious duty. Bible reading is something we engage in because we are supposed to do so! I would be bold in saying that very few in the church know what it is to enjoy a closeness with the Saviour, where the heart’s hidden secrets are poured out; where we learn what touches the heart of the groom; where we gain a consciousness of the Saviour’s presence; where we allow the groom to speak to us regarding anything – even the shortcomings in our lives. Solomon’s Song is convicting if we take it to heart, because Solomon enjoyed the company of a Shulamite woman more than many of us enjoy the presence of the Son of God.
There is much more that can be said regarding this spiritual song. But I will leave that for another post. Let us, as the bride in Solomon’s song, depart from our room and search for the groom! His sweet communion will be found in the precise spot where we left it!
