The Book of Ecclesiastes and
the Song of Solomon
Trinity Theological Seminary of
South Florida
Lecture and Study
The Book of Ecclesiastes and the
Song of Solomon
This course is a study of the Book of
Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon.
This lecture is of the Study of the content
of these two books of the Old Testament.
The Book of Ecclesiastes
Considerations



OT book of Wisdom Literature. Ecclesiastes is philosophical in character,
posing deep questions about the meaning and nature of human existence.
“Ecclesiastes” is the Greek title for the book and has come into English from
the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT). In keeping with an early
Jewish practice of adopting the first few words of a book as the title, the
Hebrew title of Ecclesiastes is “The Words of Koheleth, the Son of David,
King in Jerusalem.” It is also known simply as “Koheleth.”
The term “Koheleth” is the author’s title for himself throughout the book
(Ecclesiastes 1:1-2, 12; 7:27; 12:8-10). It is the Hebrew participial form of
a verb meaning “to assemble,” and thus it seems to designate one who
speaks in an assembly. The word has often been translated “the Preacher”
in English. Because of the philosophical nature of the book, however, the
title possibly indicates the author’s function or station as a leader in the
community of wise men.
The Book of Ecclesiastes

1:1 The words of . . .—Such superscriptions are common
in wisdom (Proverbs 1:1; 25:1; 30:1) and prophetic
literature (Isaiah 1:1; Jeremiah 1:1). words—in this
context proverbial wisdom words (cf. 12:9, 10), but it
may also refer to the deeds and events which are
described in the book (Crenshaw). Preacher—Hebrew,
qoheleth, meaning “assembler,” one who gathers the
congregation together (cf. 1 Kings 8). The Septuagint
translated the term as ekklesiastes in Greek, from which
the English title of the book is derived. The author uses
it as a proper name: Qohelet (cf. 1:12). son of David—
“Son of” often means “having the qualities of” (e.g.,
sons of Thunder, sons of the prophets) or “descendant
of” [Christ as the son of David (Matthew 1:1)]. Many
think this identification refers to Solomon because of his
gift (1 Kings 3) and intense pursuit of wisdom (1:17),
which is consistent with the ethos of the book.
The Book of Ecclesiastes





AUTHOR
The authorship of Ecclesiastes presents complex questions, on which biblical scholars
disagree. Early Jewish tradition was divided over the issue, ascribing the book to King
Hezekiah and his school, as well as to King Solomon.
Internal evidence is often appealed to for support of Solomon as the author of
Ecclesiastes. The first verse ascribes the authorship of the book to “the son of David.”
Other passages (e.g., 1:16-17; 2:6-7) also seem to refer to Solomon, who succeeded
David as king of the united kingdom of Israel. Those who reject Solomonic authorship
interpret such references as literary devices, written by a later unknown author in
order to use Solomon’s devotion to wisdom as a context for his own ideas about life’s
purpose and meaning.
A number of passages in the book have been appealed to in support of nonSolomonic authorship. Some scholars allege that if the book had been written by
Solomon, he would not have used the past tense about his reign “over Israel in
Jerusalem” (1:12). Proponents of Solomonic authorship point out, however, that the
Hebrew verb “was” can also mean “became,” thus stating that Solomon had become
king in Jerusalem.
It is also alleged that 1:16 supports a date of writing by an author who lived much
later than Solomon. They say that Solomon could not have said that he was wiser
than “all who were over Jerusalem before me,” for that would point to a long
succession of kings before him. But the author may have meant prominent wise men
rather than kings (see 1 Kings 4:31).
The Book of Ecclesiastes


One of the chief difficulties with Solomonic authorship is the fact
that OT history does not record a period of spiritual revival in
Solomon’s life as a context for the book of Ecclesiastes. That is not a
conclusive argument, however, for the thoughts recorded in the
book are intensely personal in nature. The historical books of the OT
deal primarily with historical developments, mentioning personal
aspects of human life only where they bear upon God’s purposes as
reflected in the national history. It would, in fact, be surprising if the
extremely personal struggles recorded in Ecclesiastes were cited by
the historical writers.
The question of authorship is a difficult one, but there seems to be
no conclusive evidence against Solomon as the author of
Ecclesiastes.
The Book of Ecclesiastes




DATE
The majority of scholars who hold to the Solomonic authorship of
Ecclesiastes date the book in Solomon’s final years as king (c. 940 BC). The
book would then have been written in the golden era of Israelite wisdom,
by one of the foremost proponents of wisdom teaching.
Those who deny Solomonic authorship disagree among themselves as to
when the book was written, but most date it in the postexilic period. A
Maccabean date (c. 165 BC) is difficult to maintain, because fragments of
the book, dated in the second century BC, have been found at the Dead
Sea site of Qumran. Also, the apocryphal book of Ecclesiasticus, probably
written in the early second century BC, was heavily influenced by
Ecclesiastes. Such factors would allow little time for the writing and
circulation of the book in the Maccabean period.
A number of conservative scholars, such as Franz Delitzsch and E. J. Young,
have assigned a fifth-century BC date to the book. Many others consider it a
third-century BC document.
The Book of Ecclesiastes




INTERNAL EVIDENCE
Attempts have been made to determine the date of the book of Ecclesiastes from
alleged historical allusions. But the somewhat gloomy observations found in such
passages as 1:2-11 and 3:1-15 need be nothing more than the author’s conclusions
about the emptiness of life. They do not necessarily indicate that the book was
written in a time of national decline or social decay within Israel, a time that would
not fit with the reign of Solomon.
It is also alleged that the book contains allusions to Greek philosophical concepts.
That would indicate that it was written sometime after the Hellenization of the SyroPalestinian world effected by the conquests of Alexander the Great (356–323 BC).
One of those philosophical concepts is the “golden mean” propounded by Aristotle.
The golden mean calls for avoiding extremes in the pursuit of satisfaction in life, and
it is reflected in Ecclesiastes 7:14-18. The same concept is found in Egyptian wisdom
literature (Instruction of Amen-em-opet 9.14), as well as in Aramaic wisdom
literature. In one of the finest examples of Aramaic wisdom, The Words of Ahiqar, the
golden mean is expressed in the words “Be not (too) sweet, lest they [swallow you];
be not (too) bitter [lest they spit you out].” But the golden mean concept need not
indicate one particular period of thought; it may simply represent a basic kind of
wisdom shared by people of all times and all ethnic backgrounds.
The Book of Ecclesiastes





LINGUISTIC CONSIDERATIONS
The most critical issue in dating Ecclesiastes is the nature of the book’s language. The
Hebrew of Ecclesiastes is unique, differing stylistically and linguistically from such
fifth-century OT books as Ezra, Nehemiah, and Zechariah.
Some scholars maintain that the language of Ecclesiastes was heavily influenced by
Aramaic, and thus the book was written at a time when the Aramaic language was
influential in the Hebrew-speaking world. Others have argued that the peculiarities of
the Hebrew should be understood as affinities with Canaanite-Phoenician dialects.
It is often asserted that the Hebrew of the book is similar to later Mishnaic Hebrew,
particularly in its use of the relative pronoun. Yet the language of Ecclesiastes is
dissimilar to the Mishnah in other ways.
The linguistic evidence could point to a late date for the book, but it is also possible
that Solomon wrote in a literary style that was heavily influenced by Phoenician
literature. Such a style may have become a standard for the literary genre into which
Ecclesiastes falls. During the reign of Solomon, contacts between Palestine and
Phoenicia were quite common.
The Book of Ecclesiastes






PURPOSE AND THEOLOGICAL TEACHING
The book of Ecclesiastes demonstrates the meaninglessness of a worldview that does not press
beyond the limits of human experience to include God. It seeks to show that meaningful
satisfaction may be attained in a universe that seems to be nothing more than a succession of
wearying cycles—a universe into which people are locked with no apparent means of escape.
According to Koheleth, freedom can be achieved by fearing God and believing that God will
ultimately judge everything fairly. Thus, life has a goal and purpose that it will reach, although
in the course of history and the processes of the physical world, it may not look that way.
The book’s chief theological tenet is that God is not disinterested in the course of human events
with its gross injustices. He will judge every deed. Life, therefore, has a purpose, and human
deeds have meaning.
Koheleth is often accused of having a pessimistic view of life. One cannot read such passages
as 1:12-14, 18 and 2:1-9, 18-23 without feeling his helplessness as he viewed what seemed an
empty existence. But Koheleth’s pessimism had to do with life apart from God. To him such a
life had no meaning.
A positive good emerges from the book, however, even though it is often overlooked. Koheleth
speaks in terms of absolutes as he spins his argument. There is an absolute good for people as
they live in a seemingly meaningless world. That good is the enjoyment of God’s gifts to his
people. Thus Koheleth is not an utter pessimist. When he lifts the horizons of his worldview to
include the hand of God at work in the world, he becomes an optimist. But when he looks at
life without God, he is pessimistic, for such a view offers only despair.
Koheleth’s “theology of contentment” is clear in such passages as 2:24-25, 3:10-13, and 3:22.
The first passage seems to express a hedonistic view of life, making eating and drinking the
main purpose. The expression “eat and drink” is a Semitic idiom that seems to express the
everyday routines of life (cf. Jeremiah 22:15; Luke 17:27-28). Koheleth’s use of the phrase,
then, simply means that one should enjoy God’s providence. Life is meant to be enjoyed, not
endured.
The Book of Ecclesiastes


In 3:10-13 Koheleth sets forth the great enigma of humankind: God has put
the knowledge of eternity in the human mind. That is, he has made the
mind able to go beyond the limits of physical existence. Yet even that ability
to conceptualize the eternal does not explain all of God’s purposes.
Therefore, it is good for a person simply to accept human limitation and
enjoy whatever knowledge God gives.
Ecclesiastes 3:16–4:3 is a difficult section of the book. There Koheleth
observes the inequities of life and concludes that God allows such things for
the purpose of “sifting” people to show them that they are no more than
animals. The same principle appears in 8:11, where Koheleth observes that
when evil goes unpunished, the wicked are encouraged to continue to do
evil. In 3:18 he asserts that injustice is present in the world to distinguish
the good from the wicked. The Hebrew in that assertion should be
translated “in and of themselves.” That is, viewed alone, apart from God,
humankind is no better than animals. If one adopts a worldview that omits
God, there can be no way of knowing what lies beyond the grave (3:21).
The inequities that Koheleth observes will be corrected only in the Day of
Judgment. Thus, it is best for a person to be content with God’s providence
and not to be anxious about tomorrow (3:22).
The Book of Ecclesiastes


The key to understanding the book of Ecclesiastes is the
recurring phrase “under the sun.” That phrase defines
Koheleth’s perspective. He is not judging all human
experience as vain. Rather, he is observing life “under
the sun,” or apart from God, as vain. The apostle Paul
rendered the same verdict on the created world in
Romans 8:20-23, but he went on to say that God uses
all things in his world to work out good results for his
people (Romans 8:28). Koheleth’s viewpoint is similarly
helpful.
Koheleth has often been interpreted as expressing an
Epicurean view of life, that eating and drinking are
humanity’s highest good. In 2:1-8, however, he tests
pleasure and finds it futile. He concludes that pleasure is
not an absolute good. The passages that speak of eating
and drinking refer only to the enjoyment of those good
and necessary things that come from God’s hand.
The Book of Ecclesiastes






CONTENT
THE VANITY OF THE CYCLE OF HISTORY AND NATURE
(1:1-11)
Koheleth begins his recital of the vanity of life by observing its emptiness and the
apparent lack of purpose in the processes of nature. Human toil is fruitless (1:3), and
the endless cycle of life and history is meaningless (1:4-11).
THE VANITY OF KOHELETH’S OWN EXPERIENCE (1:12–2:26)
In this dramatic section Koheleth looks back to observe the futility of aspects of his
life that some might have regarded as possessing great value. He recalls his search
for wisdom, but pronounces human philosophy futile (1:12-18). His search for
pleasure (2:1-11) also ended in futility. In the light of this conclusion, Koheleth hardly
sets forth the attainment of pleasure as life’s highest good. The search for valid
philosophical verities is wearisome and futile in its outcome (verses 12-17). Human
toil is also vain (verses 18-23), because one can never be sure who will inherit the
reward of one’s toil (verse 21). Koheleth concludes that the greatest good is to accept
God’s providence joyfully (verses 24-26), an optimistic note in his message.
The Book of Ecclesiastes






THE PLIGHT OF HUMANITY APART FROM GOD (3:1-22)
Koheleth’s familiar statement that everything in life has its time (3:1-9) has often
been interpreted as crassly fatalistic. But those verses more probably set forth the
unalterability of life’s circumstances. Humankind is locked into a continuum from
which there is no escape, yet people are able to think in terms that go beyond the
physical (verse 11). That is the enigma of humankind. Viewed apart from God,
people really are no better than animals (verses 19-20).
CONCLUSIONS RESULTING FROM KOHELETH’S OBSERVATIONS (4:1-16)
The author begins with a gloomy outlook on life (4:1-3) but goes on to draw
conclusions of permanent value. He points out, for example, that life’s difficulties are
better faced with a partner than alone (verses 9-12).
THE VANITY OF LIVING ONLY FOR ONESELF (5:1–6:12)
Koheleth gives a powerful denunciation of a self-seeking life by focusing on God (5:12, 4-6). His condemnation of the misuse of riches and his concern for the poor (5:8–
6:9) are themes later emphasized in the NT.
The Book of Ecclesiastes




WISDOM FOR LIVING (7:1–8:17)
This fine example of OT Wisdom Literature uses a proverbial pattern (7:1-13) and
personal references (verses 23-29) to give insight into how one may find true
satisfaction. The whole passage upholds the virtue of godly wisdom. Koheleth’s
theology of contentment underlies his observation that God is the source of adversity
as well as prosperity (verse 14). He affirms that one should accept both as coming
from God. Applying wisdom to governmental authority (8:2-9), Koheleth counsels the
reader to obey the authorities. The apostle Paul gave the same advice in Romans 13.
Koheleth strikes an optimistic note (Ecclesiastes 8:13), exalting the fear of God. The
author is not totally pessimistic, for he shows that fearing God leads to genuine
satisfaction.
OBSERVATIONS ON LIFE’S SEEMING INJUSTICES (9:1-18)
“Under the sun,” that is, apart from God, there are no apparent differences among
human beings (9:1-6, 11-12). Great deeds often go unnoticed and unthanked (verses
13-16). A person should nonetheless be content, for life does offer certain benefits
(verses 7-10).
The Book of Ecclesiastes




WISDOM AND FOLLY (10:1-20)
Wisdom in the OT basically means knowing God, and folly is rejection of
God. Koheleth shows how wisdom can lead to honor and satisfaction, and
folly can lead to ruin.
KOHELETH’S CONCLUSION—FEAR GOD (11:1–12:14)
The book of Ecclesiastes began with a pronouncement of vanity on all
creation, and it ends with Koheleth looking beyond his gloomy vistas to see
God. Chapter 11 begins with a statement of human inability to understand
the ways of God. Though people are meant to enjoy life, they must
remember that the future will bring God’s judgment (11:9-10). After giving
a beautiful description of old age (12:1-8) and encouraging the reader to
fear God in youth, Koheleth states his conclusion. A person’s whole duty is
to fear God (verses 13-14). The pleasure of youth will burst like a bubble
and, without God, one will finally have nothing. Satisfaction can come only
as one fears God. Life without God is the ultimate vanity.
SONG OF SOLOMON
SONG OF SOLOMON
 Short OT book (eight chapters) containing only poetry.
Its beautiful poetic passages describe the many
dimensions of human love; there is little in this book that
is explicitly religious. In addition to the popular title, the
book is sometimes referred to as the “Song of Songs.”
This is the most literal translation of the short title of the
book in the original language and means “the best of all
possible songs.” Some writers also entitle the book
“Canticles”; this title is based on the name of the Latin
version of the book, Canticum Canticorum.
SONG OF SOLOMON


AUTHOR
There was an old tradition among the Jews that King Solomon (c.
970–930 BC) wrote the Song of Songs. This view is based on one of
several possible translations of the first verse of the Song:
“Solomon’s song of songs” (1:1, NLT). This view could be correct,
though there cannot be absolute certainty, for the last words of the
verse in the original language could be translated in various ways.
An English translation that preserves the ambiguity of the original
would be “The song of songs, which is Solomon’s” (KJV); the last
words could mean that Solomon was author, but equally they could
indicate that the song was “dedicated to Solomon” or “written for
Solomon.” As is often the case with the OT writings, authorship
cannot be known with absolute certainty.
SONG OF SOLOMON


DATE
It follows that if the authorship is uncertain, there must also be
uncertainty concerning the date at which the song was written. If
Solomon was the author, it was written during the latter half of the
tenth century BC. If he was not the author, then the song was
probably written at a later date. But the contents indicate that the
song must have been written and completed at some point during
the Hebrew monarchy (before 586 BC). For those who do not accept
Solomon as author, the precise date will depend to some extent
upon the theory that is adopted concerning the interpretation of the
song. If the song is an anthology of Israelite love poetry, then the
many poems making up the song would have been written at
different dates and gathered together into a single volume toward
the end of the Hebrew monarchy.
SONG OF SOLOMON


VARIOUS INTERPRETATIONS
There are two major difficulties in interpreting this book. First, the
song appears to be secular in its present form and God’s name does
not appear; the only exception to this statement is in 8:6, where
some English versions translate the text to show God’s name,
though the original text uses the name in an unusual (adjectival)
sense. The second problem is that, taken at face value, the song
contains only secular poetry of human love. What is the theological
significance of love poetry? These and other difficulties have led to a
multitude of different interpretations of the song. A brief survey of
some of the most significant interpretations will clarify not only the
problem of understanding the book but also its content and
meaning.
SONG OF SOLOMON



THE SONG AS AN ALLEGORY
One of the oldest interpretations of the song sees it as an allegory. This
view was held by both Jewish and Christian scholars from an early date.
The description of human love in the song is seen as an allegory of the love
between Christ and the church. Augustine of Hippo (AD 354–430) believed
that the marriage referred to in the song was an allegory of the marriage
between Christ and the church.
This theory was valued for a long time. It influenced the translators of the
KJV. They added chapter headings to their translations as an aid to readers
in understanding the Bible. For example, at the beginning of the first
chapter of the Song of Solomon, they wrote, “1. The Church’s love unto
Christ, 5. She confesseth her deformity, 7. and prayeth to be directed to his
flock.” It is important to stress, however, that the Hebrew text does not
mention Christ or the church. The headings represent the understanding of
the translators, not the content of the original Hebrew.
SONG OF SOLOMON





THE SONG AS A DRAMA
The view that the song is a drama is also an old one. Those who hold this theory begin by noting
that there are several speakers or actors. Perhaps, then, the song is the script of an ancient
dramatic play.
This theory has some strong points. In the manuscript of an ancient Greek translation of the OT,
headings have been added to the Song of Solomon that identify the speakers. The cast includes
bride, bridegroom, and companions. However, the headings were probably not a part of the
original Hebrew text. They reflect the interpretation of the early Greek translators.
There is one major difficulty with this theory: there is no clear evidence that drama was a form of
art used by the Hebrews. Although drama was common among the Greeks, it does not appear to
have been employed in the Near East. It is possible, however, to suggest a slight variation to the
drama theory. Perhaps the Song of Solomon is not a drama but simply dramatic poetry, similar to
the book of Job. This possibility is more plausible, but it too has difficulties. A story or plot would
be expected for either drama or dramatic poetry, but it is not clear that there is a story.
According to one interpretation, the story might go as follows. The song tells the story of true
love. A maiden was in love with a shepherd lad. King Solomon, however, fell in love with the
maiden and took her to his palace. There he tried to win her love with beautiful words but failed.
She remained faithful to the shepherd lad whom she loved. Failing to win her, Solomon released
her and allowed her to return to her true lover. The story is beautiful and simple, but it is not easy
to see in the text without added headings and explanations. Other interpreters have discerned a
quite different story in the Song of Solomon. In conclusion, it is not absolutely clear that there is
a single story being told.
SONG OF SOLOMON




THE SONG AS REFLECTING A FERTILITY CULT
Some modern scholars claim that the origin of the Song of Solomon is to be
found in the fertility cults of the ancient Near East. In ancient fertility cults
there was great emphasis on the fertility of the land, which would be seen
in bountiful harvests. The cults were designed to ensure that the land
remained fertile. They were accompanied by a mythology describing the
gods responsible for fertility. This mythology included love poetry about the
gods, and the poetry has some similarity to the Song of Solomon.
The theory might go like this: Originally the Hebrews also had a fertility
cult. The Song of Solomon contains the love poetry associated with that
cult. Later, the mythological references were omitted, so that the present
song looks like secular love poetry.
The main difficulty with this theory is the lack of any firm evidence. There is
no reference to God or any other gods in the Song of Solomon. There is no
reference to a fertility cult or any other kind of cult. If the theory has some
validity to it, the evidence no longer exists.
SONG OF SOLOMON




THE SONG AS A COLLECTION OF POEMS
This last, most probable theory of interpretation involves two basic
principles. First, the song is to be interpreted literally; it is what it
seems to be—poetry celebrating human love. Second, the Song of
Solomon is a collection, not a single piece
of poetry. Just as the book of Psalms contains songs, hymns, and
prayers from many different periods of Israel’s history, so too the
Song of Solomon contains poetry from different periods and
different authors. The common theme joining all the passages
together is human love. Opinions differ concerning where one
song ends and the next begins. There may be as many as 29 songs
in the book, some consisting of only one verse and others much
longer.
SONG OF SOLOMON


PURPOSE AND THEOLOGICAL TEACHING
If the Song of Solomon is primarily an anthology of the poetry of
human love, what is its significance as a biblical book? What are its
theological implications? First, the presence of the song in the Bible
provides a valuable insight concerning human love. The love
between a man and a woman is a noble and beautiful thing; it is a
gift of God. It is characterized by a certain mystery and cannot be
bought. But because human love is a beautiful and noble thing, it
can easily be debased. In the modern world, the Song of Solomon
provides a proper perspective and a balanced view of human love.
Further, a high value of human love is essential. Since human love
and marriage are employed in the Bible as an analogy of God’s love
for humanity, love in itself must be good and pure.
SONG OF SOLOMON



CONTENT
THE WOMAN SINGS HER LOVE SONG (1:2-7)
In each of the songs, the reader is like an eavesdropper listening to
the words of love spoken, sometimes privately and sometimes to
the beloved one. The opening song is a song of praise, rejoicing in
love and delighting in a particular loved one: “Let him kiss me with
the kisses of his mouth—for your love is more delightful than wine”
(verse 2, NIV). This song, as many others, is characterized by a
country setting, here highlighted by a contrast with the city. The
young woman is from the country and tanned from working in the
open air; it makes her self-conscious among the city women of
Jerusalem. But love overpowers self-consciousness, and it is in the
country that she will meet her lover.
SONG OF SOLOMON


THE KING CONVERSES WITH THE WOMAN (1:8–2:7)
In this passage, both the man and the woman are
talking, though it is not a conversation in the normal
sense. They are talking about each other, rather than to
each other, and the beauty of both the man and the
woman emerges, not in an abstract sense, but through
the eyes of the beholder. Though beauty may perhaps
be defined in an abstract sense, the beauty perceived by
lovers is of a different kind; it is rooted in the lover’s
perception of the loved one and in the relationship of
love that acts like a lens to focus that perception.
SONG OF SOLOMON


A SONG OF SPRINGTIME (2:8-13)
This beautiful song describes the young maiden
watching her beloved come to her. He calls her
to join him in the countryside, where the winter
has passed and the new life of spring can be
seen in the land. The beauty of young love is
here likened to the blossoming forth of fresh life
and fragrance that characterizes Palestine in
spring.
SONG OF SOLOMON


THE WOMAN SEARCHES FOR HER LOVED ONE
(2:14–3:5)
Now the woman sings and a new dimension of
her love emerges from the words of her song.
Love is full when the partners are together, but
separation creates sorrow and loneliness. The
words of the maiden evoke the desperation of
separated lovers, a desperation that could only
be dissipated when she held her lover again and
would not let him go (3:4).
SONG OF SOLOMON


THE KING’S WEDDING PROCESSION (3:6-11)
The song begins with a description of the
approach of the royal wedding procession, a
palanquin surrounded by men of war. The king
approaches the city for his wedding, and the
young girls of the city go out to greet him. The
song can be compared with Psalm 45, another
wedding song.
SONG OF SOLOMON


THE WOMAN’S BEAUTY, LIKE A GARDEN (4:1–5:1)
In sumptuous language, the man describes his maiden’s beauty. To
the modern reader, the language is sometimes strange: “your neck
is like the tower of David” (4:4, RSV). But the strangeness lies
principally in our unfamiliarity with the ancient metaphors.
Nonetheless, much of the language here draws upon the imagery of
nature and wildlife, which can be appreciated by all. Again, beauty
is not described merely as something aesthetic, for it is intimately
tied to the relationship of love: “How delightful is your love, my
sister, my bride! How much more pleasing is your love than wine”
(verse 10, NIV). And again, the maiden’s beauty is not simply to be
admired; it is to be given to the beloved. So when the man stops his
words of adoration, the woman offers herself to him (verse 16) and
he accepts (5:1).
SONG OF SOLOMON


THE WOMAN SPEAKS OF HER BELOVED (5:2–
6:3)
In this song, the woman is talking with other
women, and the man is not present. As she
speaks about her lover, there is a change from
words expressing a sense of loneliness and
separation (5:4-8) to a resurgence of delight as
she contemplates her loved one. The sorrow of
separation from her beloved is dispelled as she
recounts to them the handsomeness of her man
(verses 10-16).
SONG OF SOLOMON


THE MAN SPEAKS OF HIS LOVED ONE’S BEAUTY
(6:4–7:9)
This long passage may contain more than a
single song; there are words from the man, the
maiden, and the female companions. The
principal theme is further description by the man
of his beloved’s beauty (6:4-10; 7:1-9), a theme
already known from an earlier passage (4:1–
5:1). Each part of the maiden’s body is
exquisitely beautiful in the eyes of the one who
loves her.
SONG OF SOLOMON


THE WOMAN AND THE MAN REFLECT UPON LOVE (7:10–8:14)
Both partners speak in this complex passage, which may contain a
number of short love songs. While some parts are difficult to
interpret (especially 8:8-14), other verses reveal in the most
profound language the meaning of love. Love, that most powerful of
all human relationships, creates a sense of mutual belonging and
mutual possession: “I belong to my lover, and his desire is for me”
(7:10, NIV). And later, the girl speaks of love with words that
convey one of the most powerful understandings of love in the
entire Bible: “For love is as strong as death. . . . Many waters
cannot quench love; rivers cannot wash it away. If one were to give
all the wealth of his house for love, it would be utterly scorned”
(8:6-7, NIV).
The Book of Ecclesiastes and the
Song of Solomon


This is the end of this lecture format.
Complete the Assignment on Ecclesiastes and
the Song of Solomon. Use the KJV of the
Bible. A link is attached to the assignment for
reading. Once finished with the assignment,
complete a 1,000 word essay contrasting the
similarities and differences in both
Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon.
The Book of Ecclesiastes and the
Song of Solomon
References:
Illumina Bible, Bible Dictionary,
New International Version Bible
King James Version Bible
Revised Standard Version Bible
