{"id":4881,"date":"2012-04-04T01:00:04","date_gmt":"2012-04-04T09:00:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lighthousebc.com\/beacon\/?p=4881"},"modified":"2012-04-17T16:41:46","modified_gmt":"2012-04-18T00:41:46","slug":"bob-song-of-solomon","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lighthousebc.com\/beacon\/2012\/04\/04\/bob-song-of-solomon\/","title":{"rendered":"BOB – Song of Solomon"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

by Stephen Rodgers<\/em><\/p>\n

SONG OF SOLOMON IN\u00a010\u00a0WORDS\u00a0OR\u00a0LESS<\/strong><\/p>\n

“Married love is a beautiful thing worth celebrating.”<\/p>\n

TITLE<\/strong><\/p>\n

I’ve been generally pleased with the way this section works when I quote MacArthur\/MSB and\/or Constable\/NET…so I’m going to do that again.<\/p>\n

From the MSB:<\/p>\n

The Greek Septuagint (LXX) and Latin Vulgate (Vg.) versions follow the Hebrew (Masoretic Text) with literal translations of the first two words in Song 1:1\u2014\u201dSong of Songs.\u201d Several English versions read \u201cThe Song of Solomon,\u201d thus giving the fuller sense of 1:1. The superlative, \u201cSong of Songs\u201d (cf. \u201cHoly of Holies\u201d in Ex. 26:33, 34 and \u201cKing of Kings\u201d in Rev. 19:16), indicates that this song is the best among Solomon\u2019s 1,005 musical works (1 Kin. 4:32). The word translated \u201csong\u201d frequently refers to music that honors the Lord (cf. 1 Chr. 6:31, 32; Pss. 33:3; 40:3; 144:9).<\/em><\/p>\n

From Constable’s notes:<\/p>\n

In the Hebrew Bible the title of this book is \u201cThe Song of Songs.\u201d It comes from 1:1. The Septuagint and Vulgate translators adopted this title. The Latin word for song is canticum<\/strong> from which we get the word Canticles<\/strong>, another title for this book. Some English translations have kept the title \u201cSong of Songs\u201d (e.g., NIV, TNIV), but many have changed it to \u201cSong of Solomon\u201d based on 1:1 (e.g., NASB, AV, RSV, NKJV).<\/em><\/p>\n

If anyone is interested, \u00a0the ASB’s, NIVSB, and NET all render it “Song of Songs,”\u00a0whereas the ESVSB, MSB, and RSB all render it “Song of Solomon.” \u00a0This is in keeping with the translation standards that Constable mentions (with the NET in the former category and the ESV in the latter).<\/p>\n

AUTHOR\u00a0&\u00a0AUDIENCE<\/strong><\/p>\n

There is division among scholars as to the issue of Solomonic authorship. Jewish and Christian tradition have long and uniformly held that Solomon is the author of Song of Solomon, and that this is likely the greatest of the 1,000+ songs he composed. However, even among conservative scholars, this is not a uniform view. \u00a0The ESVSB for example, cites the following reasons for doubting the traditional position on authorship:<\/p>\n

First, Song of Solomon 1:1 is grammatically ambiguous: it need not mean that Solomon wrote the Song of Solomon, only that it was written in his honor. Second, what is known of Solomon himself from 1 Kings raises problems with the suggestion that Solomon was the author. For example, 1 Kings 2 gives a concise summary of how Solomon\u2019s kingdom was established (cf. 1 Kings 2:46), which is followed immediately by the statement in 1 Kings 3:1 that \u201cSolomon made a marriage alliance with Pharaoh king of Egypt.\u201d Pharaoh\u2019s daughter, however, could not have been the country girl (a Shulammite) who is the heroine of the Song of Solomon (though some hold that Solomon might have married the Shulammite before he married Pharaoh\u2019s daughter). Likewise, Solomon\u2019s full harem (1 Kings 11:1\u20138) makes him a very bad example of married love for Israel (though some have replied that the Song of Solomon reflects Solomon\u2019s wisdom that came from his chastened perspective as he reflected on his own life). Third, the book mentions Solomon (Song 1:5; 3:7, 9, 11; 8:11\u201312), but generally as a distant, even idealized figure.<\/em><\/p>\n

I’d like to take the opportunity to briefly rebut some of those objections if I may:<\/p>\n