Skip to main content

Song of Songs 4:1-5:1: Seductive Compliment

How beautiful you are, my love,
   how very beautiful!
Your eyes are doves
   behind your veil.
Your hair is like a flock of goats,
   moving down the slopes of Gilead.
2 Your teeth are like a flock of shorn ewes
   that have come up from the washing,
all of which bear twins,
   and not one among them is bereaved.
3 Your lips are like a crimson thread,
   and your mouth is lovely.
Your cheeks are like halves of a pomegranate
   behind your veil.
4 Your neck is like the tower of David,
   built in courses;
on it hang a thousand bucklers,
   all of them shields of warriors.
5 Your two breasts are like two fawns,
   twins of a gazelle,
   that feed among the lilies.
6 Until the day breathes
   and the shadows flee,
I will hasten to the mountain of myrrh
   and the hill of frankincense.
7 You are altogether beautiful, my love;
   there is no flaw in you.
8 Come with me from Lebanon, my bride;
   come with me from Lebanon.
Depart from the peak of Amana,
   from the peak of Senir and Hermon,
from the dens of lions,
   from the mountains of leopards.
9 You have ravished my heart, my sister, my bride,
   you have ravished my heart with a glance of your eyes,
   with one jewel of your necklace.
10 How sweet is your love, my sister, my bride!
   how much better is your love than wine,
   and the fragrance of your oils than any spice!
11 Your lips distil nectar, my bride;
   honey and milk are under your tongue;
   the scent of your garments is like the scent of Lebanon.
12 A garden locked is my sister, my bride,
   a garden locked, a fountain sealed.
13 Your channel is an orchard of pomegranates
   with all choicest fruits,
   henna with nard,
14 nard and saffron, calamus and cinnamon,
   with all trees of frankincense,
myrrh and aloes,
   with all chief spices—
15 a garden fountain, a well of living water,
   and flowing streams from Lebanon.
16 Awake, O north wind,
   and come, O south wind!
Blow upon my garden
   that its fragrance may be wafted abroad.
Let my beloved come to his garden,
   and eat its choicest fruits.
1I come to my garden, my sister, my bride;
   I gather my myrrh with my spice,
   I eat my honeycomb with my honey,
   I drink my wine with my milk.
Eat, friends, drink,
   and be drunk with love. (NRSV)

This is the first long section spoken largely from the voice of the man. The key is to remember to whom this poem is uttered. It is to the woman, not to the audience. It's a poem of praise to her, not a description of what she looks like.[1] While sexually charged it is also not pornographic. Its goal is to seduce.

The man praises her eyes, hair, teeth, lips, neck, cheek, and breasts. She is a goddess in his eyes, but rather than say that, he describes her in goddess-esque terms. One could just use an adjective to describe each part. Her hair is thick and wild, her eyes pure, her teeth white, her lips red, her neck well ornamented, her cheeks vibrant and seductive, and her breasts young and lively. Wasn't that boring? Instead the man engages in the hard work of making metaphors. Rather than capturing all of these desirable traits descriptively, he unleashes the beauty of the woman more profoundly than if he had described her.

The second half of the poem mirrors the first, turning his attention to the joy of indulging in all she has to offer. It's a sensual treat, as always in the Song, engaging sight, smell, touch, and taste. A strong sense of longing emerges. The second half of the poem reveals his desire. His desire is to see, smell, touch, and taste again. Yet the woman is removed from him. She has removed herself.[1] Yet she proves willing to let him in. His poem has done the trick. He has obtained what he desires. His words have put her at his mercy. They will consume until intoxicated.

There is a sense of beauty in the way that the relationship between the man and the woman is portrayed. The man isn't demanding his woman do what he wants. He's trying to get her to volunteer. There is no manipulation and while erotic, his compliments are tasteful. We know that the woman desires the man, too. So she gives in pretty easily. At the level of the relationship between the man and woman, this poem exemplifies one form that a healthy relationship can take.

As I've mentioned in several posts, I'm not convinced that this is all there is to the poem. I must wonder if the woman isn't intended as a negative example to other young, unmarried girls. She gives in easily to her love's compliments and requests. It may represent the parental desire to control their daughters' sexuality. 'No matter what they say, don't be like this woman and give in.' Stay in control of yourself. Don't be intoxicated. As Longman points out (though he doesn't really do anything with it), two pieces of the description of the woman are paralleled in Proverbs as descriptions of the immoral woman (oil + honey mouth, plus the reference to cinnamon). This could be a case of intertextuality supporting the case for an ironic reading of the Song.

-----------------------
[1] Exum makes this point forcefully.

[2] While not persuaded by Garrett's overall thesis, I do believe he does justice to the overall tone of the poem and rightly sees it as the man's attempt to get the woman to give up that which she is at the moment withholding.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Calvinist than Calvin?

I'm working on a paper on the topic of divine sovereignty and human freedom. Occasionally on this topic (or the subtopic of election) you will hear people through out the barb at strong Calvinists that they're 'being more Calvinist than Calvin.' After having read Calvin carefully on the issue I don't think that there's any validity to that charge. I don't see a material difference here between Calvin and say John Piper. Here are several quotes from the Institutes to prove my point. 'All events are governed by God's secret plan.' I.xvi.2 'Governing heaven and earth by his providence, he also so regulates all things that nothing takes place without his deliberation.' I.xvi.3 'Nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by him.' I.xvi.3 Calvin explicitly rejects a limited providence, 'one that by a general motion revolves and drives the system of the universe, with its several parts, but which does not specifc

Galatians 2:11-14: The circumcision group

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (TNIV) There's an important issue that we need to wrestle with in this passage, and it's the question of whether or not the people from James and the circumcision group are the same group. I am not inclined to think that they are. The ensuing discussion is drawn from Longenecker's commentary pp 73-5

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat