This paper is a detailed commentary on the Song of Songs using the rabbinical commentaries themselves to isolate the clear Messianic intent of the Song. This surprising story is a must for all who would see the possibilityof the conversion of Judah and understand better the nature of the Church and its relationship with Messiah.

Email: secretary@ccg.org

This paper is available from the World Wide Web page:
http://www.logon.org and http://www.ccg.org

The Song of Songs is a most powerful allegory. The real intent of the Song has not been understood. It particularly relates to the conversion of Israel and Judah. Basically it is written in allegory and was not meant to be understood until the last days. The five songs of the Song have long been held most holy by rabbinical authorities. We will see just how close they are to the truth in their understanding. They just don’t make the jump. This paper attempts to tie the Song in with the NT to make it much easier for anyone with the knowledge of Judaism to make the jump. The aim is to assist them in understanding the Messianic import of the Song of Songs as the book of Esther had an enormous Messianic input as we saw. When you unravel the book of Esther and Proverbs 31 as we did and the Song of Songs, you see from the Old Testament that they understood what was happening in the Messianic prophecies. They understood what the New Testament had to say. The New Testament merely reinforces the Old, not replaces it.

The repetition of the noun in the genitive expresses the superlative; e.g. most holy (Ex. 29:37; lit. holy of holies. The naos, or holy of holies as the Temple of God is in fact the Church as the elect in the NT (1Cor. 3:16-17)). This is regarded as the choicest of Songs composed by Solomon (cf. 1Kings 5:12) (Metsudath David). The rabbis interpreted the phrase as a double song in which extensive use is made of parallelism. R. Simon said that it is double and re-duplicated, containing Israel’s praise of God and God’s praise of holiness. This view, as we will see, is only part of the story. The Soncino deals with Malbim's approach to the Song of Songs and the allegory involved. Malbim totally rejects Rashi's approach to the Song which the Soncino notes as being shared by most exegetes, although they differ in details (see Ibn Ezra, Akedath Yitschak, and Metsudath). Malbim rejects their interpretation that this is a parable of a love story, symbolising the love between the Lord and His people Israel.

Malbim's interpretation adds interesting comment on the story. The Soncino quotes this extract from his introduction and epilogue. This is not just a love poem. At one stage they were going to take it out of the Bible because people were singing it in the saloons and taverns and turning it into a ribald song. But this is the story of the church and Messiah and it then extends into the nation Israel. That is why the Jewish authorities cannot understand it, because to understand the Song of Songs you have to understand the relationship of Messiah and his church. You have to understand the history of the church after the death of Messiah and after the dispersion of Judah to fully understand the Song of Songs. This is a prophecy and relates to Revelation chapters 2 and 3. Lets look at what Malbim says.

This is the same story, in effect, as Esther. If you recall Esther was taken from Mordecai’s house and placed before the king to marry him.

This is the Church and Christ.

The rabbis understand part of it but not all of it. This is not just the physical; it is the carnal mind being in enmity towards God. The leader or captain of the Host of heaven was Jesus Christ. It was the captain of the army of the Lord that spoke to Joshua at Jericho and said ‘take off your shoes for where you stand is holy ground’. They are exactly the same words as the angel of God spoke to Moses when he gave him the law. So the rabbis are there but they have not taken the jump.

There is only one bridegroom who puts on a priestly diadem and that is the Messiah, Jesus Christ. These rabbis are talking about an OT book. These people reject Jesus Christ yet the language is unmistakably Messianic.

Yes, it was that God did long to pour out His Holy Spirit on Israel but the only way that He could do that was through the Messianic sacrifice of redemption. The rest of the OT is quite clear, especially from Isaiah 53, that the sacrifice of Messiah was important in order to get Israel ready so that the Holy Spirit could be poured out. So before the Song of Songs was able to happen and the Holy Spirit was given to humans, Isaiah 53 had to happen and therefore Christ had to be crucified. So the Rabbis understand this yet deny that Messiah was there and denied that Jesus Christ was the Messiah even though he was crucified. All of the things that are prerequisites to the Songs of Songs being able to be affected and the Holy Spirit to be poured on God’s people had already occurred in Jesus Christ. Yet the rabbis rejected it.

The physical barrier between the holy of holies was a curtain veil, which was torn in two by Jesus Christ. All the language of the rabbis here mirrors the symbols of the gospels.

This is exactly what happens to the individual on baptism and it is by baptism we put to death the old man. We strip ourselves of physical being and enter a relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. They understood what had to happen. When they wrote this, Christ had already been killed.

Also it relates to the law. It relates to the physical and the spiritual with the Church.

You can see the rabbinical confinement of this text. They have to look at Solomon and the spiritual and the physical and they don't make the jump that they are looking at Judah as the kingship under Solomon, the physical aspect of Judah. Everything relating to the OT was related on a physical plane and the Jews even today relate everything to a physical plane. They don’t understand the spiritual nature of the Church. The Church itself is then broken free. There it looks as though it is simply a battle between the spiritual and the physical relating to Solomon himself. Yet in the stories you are looking at Solomon on the one hand and the beloved on the other. You are thus looking at Judah and the physical aspects of the law on the one hand and you are looking at the beloved, who is the Messiah and the Church on the other. The woman is the Church, the nation, who has been torn between the physical aspects of Judaism and the structure of the Temple under Solomon. You are looking then at Messiah who is literally taking the Church into the wilderness out of the confines of its own captivity. That implication is not drawn by the rabbinical authorities, and for good reason, because the moment they acknowledge that there are two aspects involved, there are two people. You are not just talking about Solomon’s soul and his spirit, the nephesh, which is the spirit of man, which can’t go to God anyway unless Solomon is dead. The rabbis looking at Ecclesiastes would have to then start talking of the Babylonian soul doctrine to make sense of this text in a non-Messianic way. This text can only be made sense of in a biblical structure, given the fact that the soul returns to God who gave it, on death, and there is no existence after death. They then have to introduce the Babylonian mysteries and the soul to try and confine it and get away from a Messianic explanation. Without the Babylonian mysteries you have to have a division between Solomon and the beloved and that is probably the most important distinction between what the rabbis are trying to explain of the Song of Songs and its true meaning.

The explanation by Malbim is clever and is perhaps the closest we find to a Messianic explanation in the Judaic commentaries. In general the full significance of the Song is not understood. The wording of the explanation (from p. 37) is significant.

One of the problems of the rabbinical traditions is that the relationship of the Song to the concepts of the nephesh or soul (here showing the Babylonian influence) stem from the inability to relate the text to Messiah as the Beloved and the Church as the holy maiden.

The aspects of the elements of the nephesh being involved in five aspects are relevant to the twelve elements of the complete righteous being. The concept of righteousness and the Holy Spirit relate to concepts of five and twelve. The whole calendar centres on it and the parables of five loaves and two fishes, feeding of the five thousand, how the loaves were taken up. The papers leading into the Passover, were geared around understanding the text in Matthew, whether the five loaves and two fishes were used to feed the five thousand; the manning of the baskets; how they were taken up; how the loaves were developed and how they were then divided; and what the understanding of each of the baskets was. It related to the Holy Spirit and it relates to the elements of seven and five which make up the twelve elements. Also the holy year, that of the sacred calendar, is all divided in the same way. The human being when converted appears to be composed of twelve elements in two aspects of seven and five. They appear to be inter-related with, and form the basis for, the parables of the feeding of the multitudes by Christ. The symbolism is in essence derived from the Song of Songs. The first element however is the overall relationship of Christ and the Church, which is comprised of five songs of the Song of Songs, even though there are seven Churches related in Revelation.

The fact that there are five divisions of the song and five divisions of the woman, who is the Church, and not seven, is because two of the Churches do not enter into the Kingdom of God. The Sardis and the Loadicean Churches do not enter the Kingdom of God. There are only individuals of those two Churches who make it in.

The division of the Song into five parts relates how the maiden flees the king's chamber into the wilderness five times. The church in the wilderness is in five separate stages. The first four times she is returned from the wilderness to the king's palace. On the fifth occasion she goes out to the wilderness and remains there with her beloved, never to return. Why? The answer is because Messiah comes and the last Church, the last group of the elect, is united with the Messiah. This is held by Malbim as representing the four times that God appeared to Solomon. Malbim's interpretations regarding Solomon and the soul from this point are considered to be incorrect. It is true that God through the Angel of Jehovah appeared four times. God or elohim as the Angel appeared five times to Solomon as Judah, but the Judaic system was appealed to by the Church over two thousand years, in each of its seven elements. The Sardis and Laodicean Churches could not convince Judah at all. But Judah will be converted in the last days and Judah will be restored ahead of Israel and the household of David which we are and ahead of Jerusalem, so that nobody can exalt themselves against Judah. Look at Zechariah from chapter 11 to 12; we will see that that sequence occurs. The real relationship, namely, of that of the Lord and His people, which is the view of most rabbinical authorities, is transferred to the Church. It depends on who the people of God are during this phase. When Christ ordained the seventy he transferred the authority from Judah under the Sanhedrin to the Church under the council of the seventy. Both were the council of the seventy but when Christ ordained those elders he transferred the authority of Judah to the Church and removed all authority from Judah including the calendar. In the same decade as the council of Nicea, Judah changed the calendar. The council of Nicea changed the Godhead into the Trinity and Judah under Rabbi Hillel II changed the calendar but they had no authority. This, the inner circle of the elect, is viewed in a structure of Churches. The outer congregation is the whole house of Israel. If you recall, when we were looking at the meaning of Ezekiel’s Vision, we looked at the meaning of the cherubim in the visions and the four cherubim were located as wheels within wheels. The life of the creatures was within the wheels. The rabbinical authorities thus see the significance but do not understand the complexity because they have rejected the Church. The structure of the Song adds light to this complex issue.

One of the problems with the Churches of God is, over the last couple of hundred years, the Churches have seen themselves as being distinct from the nation of Israel and they are not. We developed, in the twentieth century, no clear message to give to the nation of Israel because we separated ourselves as an elitist group. We have to be able to communicate to the outer wheel. One is within the other; it is not divorced from the other. It is not a question of two separate wheels. It is a wheel within a wheel. We have to provide guidance and leadership to the other wheel because God is going to deal with the whole lot and our failure to prepare and deal with the outer wheel means that we are simply dealt with ourselves.

The first song commences with Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth, and ends with I adjure you, O daughters of Jerusalem...That ye awaken not (2:7)

The RSV translates Let him kiss me as O that he would kiss me. The text then changes from the second to the third person. The interpretation is variously as the statement of either the Shulemite of her absent lover or of the daughters of Jerusalem of Solomon. The distinction is important. Allegorically this is recited by Israel in exile, after the Shekinah has left them, and they long for its return. After the Holy Spirit had left Israel it is then recited by them in Israel and they long for the Shekinah’s return. That is the symbolism that is being put across here. God and Israel are symbolised by a bride and bridegroom, who kiss each other on the mouth (Rashi). The elohim, here understood as the bridegroom, is understood from the NT as being the subordinate elohim of Psalm 45:6-7, Hebrews 1:8-9. This elohim is Messiah. Thus the relationship is not fully understood by the rabbinical authorities.

For thy love (Heb. Dodim meaning also caresses and manifestations of love; Ibn Ezra) is better than wine. It is a Hebrew idiom to call every banquet of pleasure and joy by the name of wine (cf. Esther 7:2; Isa. 24:9) (Rashi). Allegorical interpretation refers it to the giving of the Torah and God's speaking directly to Israel (Rashi). We know however, that the God who spoke at Sinai, was the Angel of the Covenant or Presence and that no man has seen God ever (Jn. 1:18; 1Jn. 4:12; 1Tim. 6:16) or heard His voice (Jn. 5:37) and that the law was delivered by angels in the hands of a mediator (Gal. 3:19). So the rabbis do not understand that they are dealing with Messiah in the Old Testament in receiving the law which was Jesus Christ in the New.

The verb is feminine although the subject is masculine. Ibn Ezra holds that the noun shemen may be feminine although this is the only instance of it in the Scriptures. The feminine form more correctly relates to the Holy Spirit as the instrument of the imparting of the Shekinah (which is the manifestation of the presence of God in the Spirit) to the bride. The Holy Spirit conveys the presence of God that’s why it is correctly understood in the feminine. That is why wisdom is listed in the feminine in Proverbs 8:22. So the Holy Spirit is a feminine capacity and the Church is feminine and a bride because it develops a relationship with God through the Holy Spirit. The name is the name of Messiah. The Philadelphians of Revelation are those of the maidens who do not deny the name (Rev. 3:8), given to Messiah by God. The oils poured out are held to be symbolic of the miracles performed in Egypt. The report of the miracles attracted people from other nations (Metsudath David).

There are Hebrew words in the Song of Songs which do not occur anywhere else in the Bible. The Greek word love, agape, which refers only to the love of God, is not a Greek word. It is a transliteration of the Hebrew word SHD 158 ‘ahab in the feminine form SHD 160 ‘ahabah which occurs in the Song of Songs with other words for love (SHD 157; ‘ahab; SHD 1730; dowd as a love token and even an uncle; SHD 7474; ray’ah a female associate, hence love). Ahabah has nothing to do with sexual erotic love when used in relation to these concepts (see esp. Jer. 31:3). Isaiah 63:9 shows that it is this word that applies to the love of God through the Angel of the Presence and the redemption of Israel. The word for love here is ahabah and that is where the Greeks got their word agape. Agape was not a word in the Greek language until they translated the Hebrew Bible into Greek in the Septuagint (LXX). They developed the word agape to transliterate the Hebrew word ahabah because the Greeks didn’t have a word for divine love. They had erotic love, eros, and they had the word for filial love, philadelphia, but they did not have a word for Godly love, agape. So they had to transliterate the word ahabah and it became the word agape and then they try to tell the elect what it means. In fact, Greek philosophy and theology is so totally deficient, because all of their philosophical ideas are founded upon erotic and filial love and they do not comprehend the concept of agape love. That is, the love of a superior to a subordinate. Greek philosophical ideas are that only like can love like, and only like can befriend like, and only like can satisfy like, therefore you can’t be reconciled to God except by a sacrifice of God. So Christ had to be God, as God, in the Trinity to reconcile us to God. That is a Greek concept and not a Hebrew concept. We could be reconciled to God in the Hebrew through the sacrifice of doves and goats and sheep and cattle. The whole structure was that the high priest had to lay down his own blood in the New Testament to reconcile us to God. That is a Hebrew concept, that a superior can be reconciled to an inferior through an intermediary sacrifice. No such thing can occur in Greek philosophical thought. The real reason the Greeks invented the Trinity was in fact to place themselves on an equality with God such that they did not have to obey God. But the structure is that their understanding is deficient because their loan words that are involved here are in fact Hebrew loan words transliterated. It is most important that you understand that the word for divine love here does not relate to any Greek concepts and the Greeks do not understand, theologically, the Hebrew concept involved in the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, nor can they ever within their philosophical structure. They have to divorce themselves from Greek philosophy in order to accept Hebrew theology and be saved. The reason the Churches of God were undermined in the twentieth century was because pseudo-Greek theologians who, hampered by the epistemology of Plato and Greek theology, failed completely to understand books like the Song of Songs and the sacrifices involved either in Hebrew or New Testament theology. They simply did not know what they were doing.

Rashi says that the text means I heard from your messengers that you wished to draw me. I say that we will run after thee to be thy wife (Soncino). The taking into the private chambers of the king indicates being taken by force. Ibn Ezra interprets the text as meaning Were even the king to bring me into his private apartment, still I would rejoice and be glad in thee (Soncino). The chambers of the king are distinct from the lover of the Shulemite.

Sincerely or rightly do they love thee is connected with the Hebrew word for upright hence the expression they love thee with uprightness (Rashi). Ibn Ezra renders the text: More than proper wine do they love thee (Soncino).

The fact that the beloved is a Shulemite is of immense importance and this concept relates also to the concept in the kings when you are dealing with Elisha. Shulem or Shunem is in Issachar, near Chesulloth, on a steep slope of Gilboa; now called Salem (Young's Concordance). Strong makes Shulem distinct from Shunem. However, the meaning is the same as Salem i.e. peaceful. Shunem means rest or quiet. Hence the meaning of both terms has Messianic connotations. This is the reflection of the prophecy of Messiah as coming from the woman who is the Shulemite. The reference is deduced from 2Kings 4:11-37. There is no text in the Bible that is there for adornment, or simply for dressing. Every single text in the Bible has some meaning in relation to the story of Messiah or the purpose of the Church or the plan of God.

This is symbolism - remember the Fall of Jericho. God sent two witnesses into Jericho and spoke to Rahab the harlot and she was saved intact because the red cords were placed on her windowsill, symbolising the blood of the Passover lamb. She and all her family were saved because of their loyalty to the witnesses and their attitude to the occupation of Israel. This same situation occurs with Elisha and Gehazi.

The New Moons and Sabbaths were used to consult the prophets. The New Moons, more importantly than the Sabbaths, were used to consult the prophets.

This relates to the conversion of the Church from Judah and Jerusalem. The Shulemite aided the prophets. Elisha gave her a child as a gift of God through the Spirit. This child was given to represent Messiah. Proceeding from Shulem or Salem he was given to the woman but died. He died through the knowledge and power of God, occupying the bed of the prophets and for the purpose of rulership symbolised by the rod of Elisha being laid upon the face of the child. The placement of the face to face is as an image of the instrument of God. The walking once to and from represented the visitation of the Spirit to resurrect Messiah. The resurrected Messiah sneezed seven times. This sequence represents the angels of the seven Churches and the seven Churches of Revelation 2 and 3. The opening of the eyes of the child and the taking up of the son is the same activity as the marriage supper of the Lamb at the return of Messiah at the end of the last phase of the seven Churches.

It is at the last days when the child is returned to the Shulemite. The child is returned to Jerusalem in order to take up his position as Messiah and restore the fortunes of Salem or Shunem and restore the fortunes of Israel. That profound miracle by Elisha was in fact a prophesy of Messiah in its relationship to the conversion of Judah and Jerusalem. It is only at the end of the sequence that Judah and Jerusalem is to be converted.

We return to the Song of Songs.

The Shulemite was dark due to the harsh treatment of her brothers by exposing her to the sun or the elements. The Soncino notes the Midrash makes the homiletic comment: The Jew is black with anxiety during the week, but comely on the Sabbath. The Hebrew word for black denotes a ruddy hue from sunburning. The relationship with the Sabbath rest is again seen here. The notation of the keeping of vineyards is seen in Proverbs 31 where the woman of Proverbs 31 (see the paper Proverbs 31 (No. 114)) and the Shulemite here are together with Esther (see the paper Commentary on Esther (No. 63)) interwoven in the symbolism of Messiah and the Church.

The tents of Kedar are black through exposure to the elements. Kedar is a nomadic tribe descended from Ishmael (Gen. 25:13; cf. Ps. 120:5). Thus the analogy is that they both can be laundered until they are white as the curtains of Solomon, so the Shulemite can be made fair, and hence salvation is open to the Gentiles. The Soncino says that:

Rashi holds that the swarthiness is held to be superficial and, when it passes, the speaker will be found to be fairer than the others, i.e. the daughters of Jerusalem. We are talking about the conversion of the gentiles and the Rabbis themselves are talking about the conversion of the gentiles. This can only refer to the Church. The comments regarding the vines are taken to mean that her Father distributed the vines among His children. The woman was made to tend the vineyards alone by mistreatment. Daath Mikra holds this point and Rashi holds that it was in the tending of the vineyards that she became sunburned. Thus through mistreatment she was the only one about the work of the Father tending the vineyards and became hardened to the elements in the process. That is correct of the church as it was the only one about the work of the Father. She was thus the object of scorn of the daughters of Jerusalem. (Rabbinical authorities) Ibn Ezra renders the text mine own vineyards have I not kept as meaning that she had never had to keep even her own vineyards before. Rashi, as Ibn Ezra in his third explanation, holds she neglected her own vineyard to keep those of her brothers. This symbolised Israel forsaking her God, to worship the pagan deities of her neighbours (Soncino, The Five Megilloth, p. 54). Yet the daughters of Jerusalem are other than the women. We must look to alternatives.

Spiked nard was used to anoint Messiah’s feet by the woman prior to his death.

Mordecai was the name derived from myrrh, which represented Messiah as a pure fragrance as the anointed spice of Israel. The reference to these spices has important significance both to Esther and to the gospels.

The Lord makes us to lie down. Psalm 23 is alluded to here. The reference to other flocks is one of adherence to the subordinate elohim of Israel who is Messiah rather than the fallen Host. The RSV uses wanders where the word is rendered by the Soncino as veileth herself, meaning as a harlot would veil herself. She finds her lover at noon rather than at night as a wanton woman (see Soncino). The noon rest is usual (see also 2Sam. 4:5). The reference to Myrrh is also found in Esther as the basis for the name of Mordecai and relates to Messiah.

The Rose of Sharon is the humble meadow flower. Malbim holds this to say that my beauty is not remarkable, for I am just one of the flowers of the plain. The word chabatseleth occurs again only in Isaiah 35:1. The LXX and the Vulgate understand it as lily. The Targum and Saadia as Narcissus, Ibn Ezra and Kimchi as rose (Soncino). The narcissus is plentiful in Palestine and Sharon probably refers to the coastal district from Caesarea to Joppa. The lily of the valley is probably of the red variety as it alludes to the lips in verse 13.

R. Eliezer says that:

These have a spiritual connotation. Their bloom is ongoing and permanent, as the spirit would function on a continuous basis.

This sentiment is that behind Christ’s comments in Matthew 6:28-34.

The lilies of the field being spoken of by Messiah are greater than Solomon and that is the context of the Song of Songs. The Rose of Sharon here, which is the Church, is greater than Solomon and the Judaic system. Messiah was alluding to that in Matthew 6:28-34 when he elevated the Rose of Sharon from the Song of Songs above that of the house of Solomon.

The symbolism is there, but it is a superficial example of the duration of the reality. The raiment is of course the marriage garments of the elect in the marriage supper of the Lamb. The reference to the lily among thorns is a reference to the elect among the daughters of Jerusalem. The Soncino notes:

In other words, it means unless they bring you back into physical Judaism. These are a rabbi’s comments, not a Christian writing and not just one Jewish rabbi but also all of the great commentators on the Old Testament. You have to ask how they can write this and not understand? How can they not be converted when out of their own mouths they are convicted?

It might be remembered that Solomon’s love became in fact idolatry. Solomon fell from grace and became an idolater. That is a function also of the church in the last day. The daughters of Jerusalem were themselves destroyed because they did not heed the warning of Messiah within the Sign of Jonah (see the paper The Sign of Jonah and the History of the Reconstruction of the Temple (No. 13)).

The Soncino renders 2:3 as:

The beloved is Messiah among the sons of God. The Bible is quite clear that Messiah was not the only son of God. From Job 1:6 and 2:1, and Genesis 6:4, you will find multiple sons of God attributed. Also in Deuteronomy 32, Messiah (Jehovah) was allocated Israel and the nations were divided according to the number of the sons of God. Messiah alone is the firstfruit of the elect. The reference is to the first love, which must not be awakened, perhaps, until the correct time. They are saying ‘don’t stir up love’. That is why they were spoken to in parables lest they turn before they were called and brought to repentance when they could not sustain it. That is why it was given to us to understand, but Judah was not given to understand for two thousand years, because it was not their time to be called. In other words, the calling of the elect from among the daughters of Jerusalem is to be in accord with the timing and sequence of the plan of God.

The Shulemite, according to Malbim, in verse 7 is pleading that the tempters desist from trying to turn her affection towards another, after she has avowed her loyalty to her beloved. The adjuration by the gazelles of the field is a symbol of grace and beauty common in South Lebanon (Daath Mikra).

The comments about not awakening love are also held to be a caution against stirring up false love. Malbim holds this comment to be a kind of refrain marking the close of a section (cf. 3:5; 8:5).

This first section is thus dedicated to the first love which the Shulemite has for the beloved. This is of course reflected in the sentiments expressed to the Ephesian Church in Revelation 2:4. This first love was abandoned by her and the Messiah exhorted her to restore the love that she had at first.

This section ends at verse 7. Verse 8-14 begins a new section which ends at the end of this chapter. This section relates to the Ephesian Church and the stirring up love is to restore your first love. Do not commence until you are ready and if you lose your first love, then you are to stir it up again. You must keep going in a state of continual relationship with the Messiah. That is the import of the first song of the five Song of Songs.

The Soncino produces the following commentary on the next section. The division becomes apparent that we have seen a removal of the Shulemite from her first position which was centred in her own environment and her work was transferred by force, by her own brothers. So the Church in the first phase is in Jerusalem and was surrounded by the daughters of Jerusalem and Jerusalem tried to stamp out the Church. It was because of the Jews that the Church had to be transferred. They fled to Pella for the destruction of the Temple and they then set up the Ephesian era in proper, through the apostles, centred on Ephesus.

The brothers appear to represent the nation not sympathetic to the beloved. This could only be Judah. The Church is then persecuted under the circumstances we see in the text. This would accord with what we understand of the Smyrna era. The court ladies hunt foxes that destroy the vineyards. The ruse is to hunt false shepherds. The foxes are also found in the story of Samson where there are 300 tied in pairs. These symbols are explained in the paper Samson and the Judges. You also see what happens in the paper Gideon’s Force and the Last Days (No. 22).

The text uses the word kol (lit. voice) in the sense of hark (cf. Gen. 4:10; Isa. 43:3). The sense hear is applied to the meaning hark, meaning listen to the voice of the shepherd. The elect hear the voice of the shepherd (Jn. 10:25-30).

That is a powerful text and it is the thing that keeps the Church free and pure from idolatry and false doctrines. Because when you hear these false doctrines you know that they are not the voice of our master or of the shepherd, and you are simply taken away from these false teachers. The Soncino states concerning the text:

The language here is not that of a king. They are talking about the priest-Messiah, because when Christ came in the first instance he came as the priest-Messiah of Aaron and not the king-Messiah of Israel. That is why some of his disciples could not stand. That is why Judas fell away and many fell away when he did not take up the sword of the ruling monarch. This language is that of a shepherd. He is a shepherd of the sheep until the end of the era of the Churches. At the end, he comes again as king-Messiah in power and glory. That same symbolism is mirrored in the Day of Atonement, when the priest-Messiah is dressed in linen, makes atonement and then you have the separation of the goats and then he is re-attired in the apparel of the king-Messiah. So there are two priests involved. The high priest is in two forms of dress on the Day of Atonement, one as priest-Messiah and the other as king-Messiah as high priest - ruling high priest and the atoning priest. They are two different forms of dress. One is in clear white linen with no royal apparel and the other is in the total royal apparel of the ruling high priest. That is the division of the first and second instances or advents of Christ. The language is used of the shepherd for the period in the interim.

This text refers also to Psalm 114:4-6.

This is of Messiah and the Messianic advent. The hills are literally being shaken at the coming of the Messiah. So this beloved who is skipping over the hills is the one true shepherd - the Messiah.

The reversal is used in this text. Messiah makes the hills themselves skip.

Thus we deal with the period up to his return whilst he is yet distant. He is not yet returned as king Messiah. He came first as priest Messiah or the Messiah of Aaron and became High Priest of the order of Melchisedek (Ps. 110:4).

At the time of Christ, the Dead Sea Scrolls were quite clear. All of Judah expected a Messiah of two advents. They expected a Messiah of Aaron and a Messiah of Israel. Damascus Rule VII of the DSS and the unpublished fragment in cave four are quite clear that the Messiah of Aaron and the Messiah of Israel are the one Messiah. So you have one Messiah of two advents. The Jews understood that at the time of Christ. The Pharisees still killed Christ even though they knew that there had to be one Messiah of two advents. Some of them knew that they had to kill him in order to fulfil prophecy.

The Soncino notes of this text:

The beloved places his head, as head of the elect, so that it protrudes through the barriers of the earthly system. He sparkles as the new Morning Star designate.

The word sethav occurs only here - the only place in the Bible it is used. The word sethav is used to translate winter but it does not mean that. Based on Targum Genesis 8:22 it is synonymous with choref meaning winter. According to many commentators this is the second half of Kislev, Tebeth, and the first half of Shebat, ending usually in February. SHD 5638 shows this word to stem from an unused root meaning to hide and hence it means the season of hiding hence this is synonymous with winter. This is the hiding attendant upon the persecution of the Smyrna era during the persecution referred to at Revelation 2:10.

These people were persecuted ten days, but not in the west. They were persecuted ten days in the east. Diocletian’s persecution was ten years long in the eastern Churches but it was only three years long in the western Churches. That is why there is some confusion about this prophesy not being kept because a lot were looking at the persecution in west Europe and saying it was only three years, but it was ten years in the east. When the Church was based in Smyrna they were persecuted more and they took the brunt of the persecution. The persecution in the Empire was not all that long or great, in fact Gibbons says that in the entire period of the Roman Empire there were only fifteen hundred people put to death. Most of those were put to death for striking magistrates. They struck the magistrates so they could be put to death and so be in the first resurrection. That is not the way to get into the first resurrection! It wasn’t the Roman Empire that persecuted the Church overly much, it was ten years under Diocletian.

The persecution of the Church came under the successor of the Roman Empire, which was the Holy Roman Empire. They killed hundreds of thousands. It was actually the mainstream Christian church that persecuted the true Church of God.

The persecution under Diocletian in the east endured for ten years, whereas in the west it was only three years. The persecution did not cease with the Empire but occurred over many years under its successor, the Holy Roman Empire.

This verse is misunderstood. The flowers appearing are taken to be the Spring flowers in Palestine (Akedath Yitzchak). The time of singing is however rendered in the LXX and also by Rashbam as the time for pruning the vines; cf. Leviticus 25:3. This is the time of pruning the vines. We are then going into the tribulation and the pruning of the vines and tearing out the weakness in the Church. This marked the councils of Nicea, Constantinople, and Chalcedon. The vines were pruned.

The voice of the turtle [dove] is not a singing bird but a bird of passage (cf. Jer. 8:7). Its voice announces the coming of spring (Malbim).

The pruning of the vines is the understanding of the persecution and the trial of the elect. The analogy to Moses and Aaron and to Israel in Egypt and at the Red Sea is exactly that of the Church in the wilderness of the forty Jubilees on a year for a Jubilee basis. Israel was forty years in the wilderness and the Church was forty Jubilees in the wilderness. Israel was judged forty years after three year’s mission of Messiah. The gentile nations were given forty Jubilees and then the world’s systems are torn down.

The fig tree putteth forth has as the literal sense of the verb sweetens with spice which is also used for the act of embalming with spices (Soncino).

The meaning has thus a connection with the spices of affliction. This symbolism was used of Messiah at and before his burial. Myrrh is also a basis for the name of Mordecai, which has also Messianic symbolism in the story of Esther (see the paper Commentary on Esther (No. 63)). The text relating to green figs is important.

Thus the meaning is that those ripened under the season of hiding are red ripe or likened also to the wheat harvest which is that of the elect. The vines in blossom is also significant.

We are thus dealing with the firstfruit stage of the vine. This is the early stage of the calling of the elect.

Kimchi renders the text on top of the rocks. The dove in the cleft of the rocks represents a dove remaining in its nesting place when hiding. The shepherd lover, impatient at her delay to join him, urges her to leave her hiding place (Malbim).

The Church went into hiding during the persecution and could not accomplish its task. The Shepherd calls it to action.

The text is: take us the foxes or catch us the foxes.

The daughters of Jerusalem inhibited the actions of the Church. The actions of Judah even though it was hardened and thus denied conversion was able to withstand the effects of the attacks on the faith made by Gnostic elements and thus preserved intact the physical understanding of the Scriptures ready for the Restoration. In this manner the Church was able to free itself from the daughters of Jerusalem also. But the little foxes that destroyed the vineyard ultimately ended up in the councils of Nicea, Constantinople and Chalcedon. These foxes, these false priests and prophets destroyed the faith and created what is now called the mainstream Christian church and those people do not enter the first resurrection. They destroyed the vineyards of God.

The Soncino comments on the term: the little foxes is telling.

If we look back to when we dealt with Samson and the Judges, this whole structure is of Christ’s operation in the Holy Spirit with Samson to establish the forward prophesies on the bringing down of the gentile nations. These three hundred foxes were sent forward two by two, into the nations of the Gentiles, by Jesus Christ. These are the three hundred lights under bushels that got smashed at the same time so that the gospel of the Kingdom of God is brought to the Gentiles and the nations are given the understanding.

Samson used the 300 foxes to set the fields of the Philistines alight (see the paper Samson and the Judges (No. 73)). This story is a physical representation of the spiritual intervention of Messiah. It refers to the development of the Holy Spirit in the individual as it occurs with Samson. Messiah as the Angel of Yahovah (Jehovah) uses Samson to deal with the gentile system. The foxes also have application to the story of Gideon (see the paper Gideon’s Force and the Last Days (No. 22)). The foxes that destroy the vineyards are the shepherds who are to be removed from the flock. The passages in Ezekiel 34, Malachi and others show this to be the power of the rabbinical teachers. This structure had to be removed from its influence on the elect. The term in blossom means that it is easily destroyed (Metsudath David). Therefore the protection had to be extended to ensure the elect were not destroyed before they could develop.

The comment my beloved is mine in verse 16 is held to mean that the woman turns to the women (the daughters of Jerusalem) and

So the Jews separated us from Messiah and put us in the wilderness but we are still united to Messiah as the Church.

Of course the brothers of Judah did indeed succeed in separating Messiah from the Church but they are forever united in love and will be joined at the marriage supper. Judah will at last be converted and take its place when it realises the full significance of the Messianic Scriptures to which it has been blinded. A hardness of heart has come over Judah but that hardness is going to be taken away. In the last days Judah is going to be converted and Judah will be restored first.

The term in verse 17 until the day breathe is literally until the day blow’ i.e. the evening breeze rises. Metsudath David explains, ‘until the sun blow away’ from the earth (Soncino). This is held by the rabbis to be the end of the day. However, the meaning can also be that the day dawns as mentioned by Peter in 2Peter 1:19.

Messiah is the new Morning Star. The reference to the shadows fleeing can also be to the light removing all darkness and all shadow. The meaning is taken to extend until sunset as being when the shadows flee away. The separation is to be only until sunset when she will expect him (Metsudath David). Thus the rabbis did understand that the process was as a separation which entailed a reconciliation at the end. This is the reconciliation of Christ and the Church at the marriage supper.

The term: upon rugged mountains, is rendered by the Soncino as upon the mountains of spices.

This translation follows Gratz.

The mountains of division or separation are referred to in the various texts describing Messiah returning to the Church and to Israel. The mountains in the end prove to be the refuge of the survivors of the wrath of God. Division is also evident in the Church through error. The broken staff of union is the division that resulted in the separation of Israel and Judah.

Each text in the Song of Songs has a major meaning or implication for the establishment of the Church and its relationship to Judah. It also has a meaning in relation to the conversion of Judah. Once Judah understands and can place all of these in context, Judah can be converted. It will not be done by fables and will not occur out of faulty theology. We have to know what we are talking about and we have to be able to get to each of these texts in the OT and explain them so that the Jews can see by the Holy Spirit what Christ and the Church was doing for two thousand years. Once we can do that we will convert Judah.

The Soncino notes of the text:

The elect among Israel are constantly being called and are in battle with the reactionary elements of Judaism. This will only cease on the conversion of Judah as a whole. This will occur in the last days because of this constant love affair of the nation with Messiah in spite of the rabbinical resistance to the Messianic restructuring of the priesthood and the elect.

Zechariah 9:9 shows how Messiah came to the daughters of Jerusalem and they did not receive him.

The Messiah was not to be found within the structure of Jerusalem and the Temple or in the later rabbinical system. Only in the wilderness could this union occur.

The watchmen are the watchmen of Ezekiel and the scribes and executioners of Ezekiel 8:1 to 9:11.

The text then goes on to the finding of the loved one. The rabbinical authorities hold that the watchmen did not answer her (Metsudath David).

The immediate follow on from the watchmen to the beloved shows a nexus of one aspect to the other. If they answered her, she neglects to state the answer. There is an abruptness in the style here.

The bringing of the beloved into the mother’s house is as a permanent place and not skipping over the mountains that separate them (Malbim). The permanent place is a reference to the house of the Mother, which is Jerusalem and Zion as the capital of Israel and the centre of the millennial system.

The chamber of her that conceived me is an example of the parallelism that characterises Hebrew poetry. However, the chamber of her that conceived the Church is the Temple so that the mother’s house for the nation is the same as the chambers of the Church.

The text in verse 5 is held, by Malbim, to relate to the fact that the daughters of Jerusalem pursue her, and she adjures them not to alienate the love that the beloved has for her (as above v. 2). This relates to the aspects of conversion. The adjuration is that the conversion of the daughters of Jerusalem does not take place before they are ready to be called by God. In other words until it pleases God. Judah was not to be called and converted until the times of the Gentiles were completed. This period lasted seven time frames from the period of 605-525 BCE and ended in 1914-1994/95. They could not understand and it was given to them in parables so that they would not turn and be saved before they were ready to come into judgment.

The text then goes on to the next phase of the story, which relates to the power of Israel.

The Soncino makes this telling comment.

This comment shows the condition of Judah and the mighty men of Israel at this period. The question on Judah’s lips here is ‘How did the Church escape from the environs of Judah and Jerusalem?’ Firstly, Judah tried to detain the Church and destroy it. In the latter days Judah comes to this realisation and is converted from that realisation and from the adversity in which it finds itself. We see this developing from this period in history.

The fear in the night is because of the destruction surrounding the nation. The swords are on their thighs as were the bows in the hands of the men who built the walls of Jerusalem under Nehemiah (Neh. 4:10-20). The text here also says behold his bed, which is Solomon’s. The term does not say it is Solomon but rather the litter is that which is Solomon’s. This litter was the litter of the heritage of Solomon. We are thus speaking also of the descendants of Solomon over the history of the Church. The story might also be extended to embrace the power and right of Messiah who deals with the unified nation of Israel on his return. However, the time sequence indicates we are dealing with Judah in the sequence of the Church. The time sequence here would have to be during Pergamos following on from Smyrna (Rev. 2:9-17).

The persecution of the Smyrna era had been brought about by Roman authority but it had been assisted by the divisions and animosity caused by Judah. The Trinitarian systems in the west saw a reaction to their power in the east. The foundation of the Catholic system from the support of Theodosius as emperor in 381 CE saw the Church persecuted. The Judaic kingdoms in Arabia and North Africa saw Islam arise as a reaction to both systems based on some, but not all, Christian doctrines. The Church was forced into an alliance with Islam because of the Roman Empire in Constantinople. The Jewish hegemony over Arabia was destroyed at the same time. Thus Judah was set in fear and dispersed. The sixty mighty men show that we are dealing with a reduced force. It has neither the spiritual power nor the authority of the seventy of the Sanhedrin, as that was removed to the Church from Luke 10:1. The mighty men are afraid because the system, being reliant on physical force, has no power to deal with either Western Trinitarianism or of the Church and Islamite Unitarianism. The Paulicians during the Pergamos era put Constantinople’s forces to flight and pillaged Asia Minor up to the Taurus Mountains and to the sea. They gained the protection of Islam throughout the empire. The Church in Islamite Spain also enjoyed protection at this time (see the paper General Distribution of the Sabbath-keeping Churches (No. 122)). Christ said he would proceed against Pergamos with the sword of his mouth, because they were tainted by the thinking that goes with military force, and Christ deals with them accordingly.

The Church, and also Judah, was, from this time, supported in the wilderness symbolised by hidden manna. The hidden manna relates to the power of the Spirit, which was the prerogative of the Church only. However, Judah was still protected by God.

The white stones are they that formed the foundation of the Temple under Solomon. The stones also formed the system of voting in the Hellenised world. Thus the white stone with a new name is evidence of the power to contribute by voice to the government of God as part of the administration which forms the foundation of the City of God.

The crown referred to in Chapter 3:11 is not held to be a symbol of royalty but of happiness. This equated with the garlands worn on festive occasions (see Soncino). The espousals referred to here concern Solomon and the crown given him by his mother who was in fact not of Judah as she was Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah the Hittite, and hence we are speaking of a different system. The espousal may have been his wedding or refer to the union with foreign gods with which he became enmeshed.

Some refer to this text as commencing a discourse of Solomon pressing his suit with the woman and extolling her beauty; others hold that it is the Shepherd who is addressing his beloved after the arrival of his retinue. This is considered more probable (Ibn Ezra, Isaiah da Trani, Malbim).

The text here deals with the attributes of the beloved. The eyes as doves refer back to 1:15. Rashi says the comparison is suggested by the innocence of the dove. Malbim says that it is an old custom to sing praises of the bride at her wedding. Verse 1 is translated as thy eyes are as doves behind thy veil by the Soncino. The veil conceals the entire face save the eyes. This follows Ibn Ganach and Kimchi. Rashi explains that the Hebrew denotes "a hair net to keep her locks tidy; the root meaning is to ‘confine’" (Soncino). The sense is one of constraint. The beloved is beautiful and sees in beauty regardless of the constraints upon her and the limitations of the disclosure of the mysteries of God.

The comments regarding "the hair being as a flock of goats" refers to the natural glossy black colour of the goat of each braid. When the sun shone upon it, its hair glistened with a beautiful sheen (Daath Mikra). The text: that trail down from mount Gilead is regarded as presenting difficulties. It occurs only here and in 6:5. Both ancient and modern commentators vary widely in the interpretation. The Soncino considers that the best interpretation is that proposed by Professor Yahuda who connected it with an Arabic root, ‘to do a thing before dawn’. The picture here is a flock of goats coming down from the mountainside in rows just before the daybreak, forming white lines against the dark background in the dim light. It holds that this interpretation seems to be alluded to in the Midrashic comment on the phrase, viz. ‘When a woman has a luxuriant growth of hair she arranges it in white lines,’ i.e. in plaits which show white partings in between. Thus they render it as: ‘thy hair is like a flock of goats that trail down in the morning twilight’.

The difficulty might be better understood or removed, if the Church was referred to and the entire arrangement of the white rows was as the elect in white garments, being arrayed in the dawn of the Messianic system, when the day dawns in the hearts of the elect (2Pet. 1:19) who partake of the divine nature (2Pet. 1:4) and are called out of the darkness into his marvellous light (1Pet. 2:9).

The area of Gilead is that area east of the Jordan. The Soncino says that it is A chain of mountains, beyond the Jordan, intersected by numerous valleys. The tribes of Reuben, Gad and half of Manasseh found a home there [Josh. 17:1 ff.]. Gilead was renowned for its rich pasture and countless flocks [Num. 23:1; Mic. 7:14]. It lies within view of Jerusalem. The fact that it lies within view of Jerusalem is also significant. We are relating the text to the anticipation of the Messianic advent and the end of the current age. Gilead was held in nexus to the kings of Judah (Jer. 22:6). The kingship was removed because of their idolatry and given to those who became both kings and priests unto God (Rev. 5:10). Thus Gilead symbolised the place of peace for the elect. There was a balm in Gilead, yet the health of the people was not restored (Jer. 8:22) due to their idolatry (Jer. 8:19). The nations were also told to go up to Gilead to take balm (Jer. 46:11). Thus salvation was, from this prophecy over the extent of the entire book of Jeremiah, removed from Judah and extended to the Gentiles. There must be no iniquity in Gilead (Hos. 12:11). The destruction of the women of Gilead will be punished (Amos 1:13). This is the basis of the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25:31 ff. The Messianic restoration will involve Benjamin taking Gilead (Obad. 19) thus the inheritance of Reuben and Gad with half of Manasseh is elsewhere beyond the Jordan to the east.

Micah 7:14 shows that the people who are the flock of the inheritance of Messiah will dwell alone in a forest in the midst of a garden land. They will feed in Bashan and Gilead as in the days of old (Mic. 7:14). This period refers to the period after the destruction of the planet by the nations (Mic. 7:8-17). Then the restoration of the last days shall be as the exodus and it will be to Gilead and the Lebanon also (Zech. 10:10). Thus the elect shall also come from Lebanon as we see from verse 8.

The teeth are compared here to the whiteness of newly washed wool, the colour of snow (Isa. 1:18) (see Soncino). The student of the NT here will immediately recognise the symbolism of spiritual cleanness (Rev. 15:6; 19:8,14) and the washing of the robes of the elect in the blood of the Lamb (Rev. 3:5,18; 4:4; 6:11; 7:9,13,14). The fact that they are all shaped alike (Soncino), Rashi explains as ‘well numbered’, and Kimchi and Ibn Ezra explain as ‘all of the same size’. The significance is to the fact of the enumeration in the book of life of the Lamb and they are all spiritually prepared alike.

The text whereof all are paired, Daath Mikra explains that they are like sheep, each of which keeps to its mate i.e. here symbolised by the upper and lower teeth. Rashi connects a word for paired with methomm or ‘perfection’ i.e. none were decayed. This is considered to be the correct interpretation. Only by Rashi’s identification of the Hebrew can we see that the state of spiritual perfection among the elect is the subject. The Soncino renders the text: Whereof all are paired and none faileth among them. The text is interpreted as being "a play on words". ‘All of them (shekullam) are paired and none is missing (shakkulah) among them’.

Thy lips are like a thread of scarlet refers to the salvation of the Gentiles through the Passover sacrifices prefigured by the salvation of Rahab at the wall of Jericho (see the paper The Fall of Jericho (No. 142) for explanation).

The Hebrew word for mouth here is midbarech or thy speech or the instruments of thy speech, namely, the mouth. Metsudath David says that her lips being red and thin are comparable to a thread of red scarlet. Thin red lips are hardly sensual, so the sense must be concerned with text elsewhere in the Bible. The sense of the speech being perfect is also correct, when we see that that condition is the one of the creation and extended to Satan before the fall, where his instruments were perfect before iniquity was found in him (Ezek. 28:13-15) as we are expected to be perfect.

The temples being like a pomegranate split open behind the veil refers to the complexion being ruddy. The word for temple refers to the thin part of the skull and Ibn Ezra translates pelach as ‘the red flower of the pomegranate’. Accordingly, he praises her ruddy complexion. Those who translate the text as a pomegranate split open explain that the temples gleam though the veil as the mingled white and red of the pomegranate gleam through the cracks in the rind (Metsudath David). Rashi renders the text ‘like half a pomegranate’. He is praising her for the roundness of her cheeks and their ruddy colour. The reference is to the elect. The splitting open perhaps refers to the curtain. The elect went behind the veil when it was torn in two by the sacrifice of Messiah symbolised by the ruddy colour. The play on words, places the elect as the inner sanctuary.

The reference to the neck and the tower of David built with turrets whereupon hang a thousand shields, is a reference to the numbers of the inner administration of the celestial government. The sacrifice of Messiah was determined from among the thousand of the angelic Host. This inner number of the Host appears to relate to the elohim central structure and the sacrifice of one of them was determined from the beginning. This was also understood from Job 33:19-24. Metsudath David merely says that a thousand represents a large number. The shields were used as ornaments according to the Soncino (cf. Ezek. 27:11). The fact of the matter is that anciently the fortified structure was as strong as its defenders. The practice of displaying shields during heraldic times was as signs to those without of who the defenders were and they signified the composition, derivation and loyalties of the defenders.

Ibn Ezra renders the text builded with turrets as meaning for the suspension of arms. A mound or tel in which arms are stored, i.e. the neck is compared to the mound not to the swords. Rashi and Rashbam translate talpioth as if delivered from the root ‘to teach’ (aleph), the first letter being elided. The rendering of the Targum, ‘the instruction of the law,’ may have suggested this explanation (Soncino). The neck of the Shulemite is like a splendid tower built as a model for others to follow. The word is understood by the LXX as a proper noun, ‘The tower of David built towards Talpioth’. This context seems to evade the issue or complex problem presented by the text. The fact of the elect being those beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and those who would not worship the beast or take its number from the NT (Rev. 20:4) could not of course be addressed here by the Soncino.

The reference to the breasts being two fawns that feeds among the lilies has stumped the Hebrew commentators. Metsudath David holds that fawns appear more beautiful when they feed among lilies. The reference is to the feeding of the flock and the clothing of the lilies of the field as greater than Solomon in all his glory. Messiah directly refers to this concept at Matthew 6:24-34.

The concept here of the day breathing is the same as at 2:17. The cooling or breathing of the day symbolises the joy of the beloved at meeting the shepherd at the end of the day. This refers to the Messianic advent. The start of the day for the elect is also the first love when the day dawns in the heart of the elect as we see above. Metsudath David renders the text: When evening comes I shall repair to the open country, where everything is sweet and fragrant like myrrh and frankincense. The symbolism of myrrh and frankincense and especially myrrh has been dealt with in the paper Commentary on Esther and also above. The nexus with Messiah is unmistakable. Indeed those were the specific offerings by the Magi at his birth (Mat. 2:11).

Thou art fair my love and there is no spot in thee is a direct reference to the elect being without spot or blemish as we see from the primary concept of the lamb that was Messiah from 1Peter 1:19 and also of the elect at 2Peter 3:14.

This is the salutation of Messiah to the bride who is the elect. The next phase is his call to the Church.

Metsudath David concludes that "Delighted with her promise, he continues, ‘Thy beauty is indeed ravishing; I will help thee to escape from this lair of lions and leopards’" (Soncino).

The Soncino notes that the rest of the chapter describes the lover pleading with her to flee from the royal palace. Note the fervour of his pleading: Come with me do not remain with him (Solomon). The plea is the same as that made to the Church to come out of the kingdom of this world and particularly its false religious structure of which Solomon himself fell foul (Rev. 18:4). The text rendered look from the top of Amana follows Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Kimchi and others. Metsudath David renders the text: depart from the top of Amana (cf. Isa. 57:9 for the meaning of the verb). Thus he urges her to leave the royal residence in Lebanon. Amana is the name of the south of the Anti-Libanus, the eastern chain of hills facing the plain of Damascus (cf. 2Kings 5:12) (Soncino). The Lebanon range in the extreme north of Palestine consists of several summits, the highest of which are Hermon and Senir. The Soncino holds that Solomon had probably built royal residences there. In Deuteronomy 4:48 Senir is called Sion and Deuteronomy 3:9 tells us that the Sidonians called it Sirion (see also Soncino). Lebanon and Senir were also the source for the construction of the Satanic system portrayed as Tyre in Ezekiel 27:5. This was part of the lead in to the condemnation of Satan, the anointed covering cherub in Ezekiel 28, who sat on the mountains of God. The association with Eden is also not developed here when perhaps it might be appropriate.

According to Akedath Yitschak the reunion has endowed him with courage to carry her away from enforced confinement. It has put new heart (lebab) into him. Thus here Messiah is to take captivity captive (Eph. 4:8). The process is commenced with the Church.

The next text refers to my sister, my bride. This process was first embodied in the relationship between Abraham and Sarah as explained in Genesis 12:10-20 and 20:1-18. Whoever interfered between Abraham and his wife was cursed and punished. The penalty paid by Abimelech was a thousand pieces of silver. In other words, the entire thousand of God had to be appeased. This process is understood where Messiah is both the husband of the elect and their brother where all are sons of God. He is the firstborn among many brethren and the Host regard the elect as their brethren (Rom. 8:29; Rev. 6:11; 12:10).

The glance of one eye is held to be seductive by Metsudath David. The kere has the feminine for the word one to agree with the word for eye, which in Hebrew is feminine. The meaning of the kethib is held by Daath Mikra to perhaps means with one (glance) of thine eyes. The text goes on to read with one bead of thy necklace (cf. Prov. 1:9). Ibn Ezra explains this as a kind of ornamental band tied around the neck. The meaning is that one bead of the necklace, one eye of the body is betrothed to the shepherd as a bride in their own right. This equates to the parable of the wise and foolish virgins (Mat. 25:1-12).

The text thy lips... drop honey is continued on to the text honey and milk are under thy tongue. The praise of God delivers the response from God so that honey and milk are the reward of the prayers of the saints. The Council of the Elders are charged with monitoring those prayers (Rev. 5:8).

And the smell of thy garments is like the smell of Lebanon is held by the Soncino to be an allusion to the oriental custom of perfuming clothes. Lebanon was renowned for its fragrance (cf. Hos. 14:7) (Metsudath David). The Soncino adds: The girl must have exchanged her humble dress for some splendid raiment worn by the ladies of the court.

The real answer was that the Shulemite did indeed obtain an new garment. This wedding garment was that obtained through baptism and the process of purification in the blood of the Lamb and through the Holy Spirit. It is fascinating that the symbolism of the elect after baptism is not taken up by the rabbinical authorities even though it is so consistent.

A garden shut up refers to the fact that the elect are a garden secluded unto all but its lawful possessor (as Metsudath David says). The Church is chaste and modest as gardens are walled to prevent the intrusion of strangers (cf. Isa. 5:5) (Ibn Ezra, Metsudath David).

Springs were sealed in the Middle East by clay which dried and had the effect of a seal thus making them private property. The capacity to drink from the waters of the elect was likewise sealed. The Holy Spirit was only advanced on a permanent basis to the elect being foreordained or predestined, chosen, called, justified and glorified (Rom. 8:29-30).

The text here translated as thy plants is literally thy sendings forth are etc (Isaiah da Trani). The meaning is that the elect send forth fruit of the Holy Spirit which both develop the mysteries of the Kingdom of God (see the paper The Mysteries of God (No. 131)) and also demonstrate and support the elect or Church as the residence of God through the Holy Spirit. Malbim holds that she is not like an ordinary garden but is full of the most delicious fruit. Pardes or park is held to be of Persian origin (cf. Eccles. 2:5) (Kohut). Marcus claims it is of Phoenician origin (Soncino). For spikenard the Hebrew nerd is nard-oil (Midrash).

Saffron is obtained from the crocus in Palestine and is used as a condiment. In Mishnaic Hebrew, it is used in a verb form, meaning to become pale (see Kohut, Jastrow; Soncino). Calamus (Heb. kaneh) is a plant of reed like stem and tawny colour, well known to the ancients and imported into Palestine from India (Daath Mikra). Cinnamon is grown in the East Indies and reaches thirty feet in height. The Soncino notes, from the Midrash, Rabbi Huna as saying: "Cinnamon used to grow in the Land of Israel, and goats and sheep fed on it". The Midrash according to Aruch holds myrrh to be the oil obtained from the plant, mingled with wine.

Aloes grow in India. Its wood is very aromatic and venerated by the natives. R. Joshua says this is foliation - an ointment or oil prepared from the leaves of the spikenard. The use of the term ohel or tent was held to mean that the substance was obtained by importation by tent-dwellers i.e. Bedouin. Others held that it is referred to as tent because it is fragrant and spreads and fills the Tent of Meeting (Midrash).

All of these comparisons are seen to have relevance to the aspects of the elect in their relationship to the Holy Spirit and their tasks in the Kingdom of God. The addition with all the chief spices means that the report of the charms of the Shulemite spread as the scent of the most precious of aromatic herbs (Metsudath David).

This fountain of gardens and well of living waters displays the Church as it is under Messiah where from him living waters flow (Jn. 4:10,11; 7:38; Rev. 7:17) and the living bread (Jn. 6:51).

The context of Chapter 5 relates to the sacrifice of Messiah and the ongoing search for the Church. The first three verses refer back to the crucifixion and the resurrection. The later verses recapitulate the ascension and the subsequent persecution of the Church.

Verse 1: I am come into my garden. According to the Soncino, in Hebrew the perfect of the verb also expresses a definite future act (Metsudath David). Her lover already imagines himself there. Sforno, homilising the whole of the chapter, applies this verse to the religious education of children. The perfect of the verb might also indicate a definite completed act. The advent of Messiah was in two forms. The Messianic intent of this text has to be denied as a past- completed action as that implies two advents and in this case a completed action. We will see that this is in fact the meaning from a comparison with the Gospels.

The sister/bride symbolism is examined above. The brother/bride of the Church example of the parables includes the wise and foolish virgins of Matthew 25:1-13.

I have gathered my myrrh with my spice. The root arah means ‘to gather fruit’ (cf. Psalm 80:13). The literal translation is ‘I have plucked my myrrh with my balsam’ (Daath Mikra).

The reference to Psalm 80:13 is relevant also because 80:8-13 refers to Israel as a vine once carefully tended but now forsaken and food for the wild beasts. The myrrh and spices are examined above and relate to the firstfruits.

The reference to honeycomb and honey is a play on the reference at 1Samuel 14:27. The brightness of Jonathan eyes was akin to the enlightenment of the Spirit. The text I have drunk my wine with my milk is avoided by the commentaries. The New Testament writers apply the concepts to the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.

The text, Eat O friend, is attributed by Rashbam as an invitation to the friends of the lovers to participate in the marriage feast. Most commentators make friends agree with beloved (which is plural) in accordance with the context and poetic parallelism (Soncino). The meaning of the friends participating in the marriage feast is explained by Christ at the parables of the wedding and again in the texts of Revelation. Those that were originally bidden to eat at the wedding did not in fact come, so those who would have been considered less worthy were invited in their place (Mat. 22:1-14). These are the friends invited to eat. However, each must have a garment. These are they who are part of the general multitude who keep the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus (Rev. 12:17; 14:12; and 22:14 see KJV for intent). Thus the marriage supper is comprised of two groups, the brides and the friends. Both are in the Kingdom of God as we see from the distinction in Revelation between the 144,000 (Rev. 7:1-8) and the great multitude (Rev. 7:9-17). The great multitude also serve God before His throne, immediately following their redemption from the great tribulation. Thus this distinction was known from the OT in the Song.

Drink, yea, drink abundantly O beloved refers to the abundance of the feeding of the elect by the Lamb. The 144,000 are fed by the Lamb as firstfruits. They alone sing the Song of the Lamb before the throne of God and the four living creatures and the elders which comprise the inner council of the elohim (see Rev. 14:1-5). There is thus a distinction between the 144,000 and the great multitude that also serve before the throne.

The text then goes on to the complex issues involved in the crucifixion and the resurrection.

Here the Messiah slept but he qualifies the text. The rabbinical commentaries show the complex difficulties they face in applying the text while avoiding the Messianic concepts.

The Soncino (referring to Daath Mikra) says:

The understanding here is obvious. The daughters of Jerusalem and the beloved both seek Messiah. The beloved that did come was rejected of Judah because he was not extraordinary. They expected the king Messiah, not the priest Messiah. The Church then extolled the gospel of grace to Judah, which was not converted save for individuals.

The comment regarding, My heart waketh deals with the resurrection through the grace of God holding the core of the Spirit. Daath Mikra explains that the heart was the seat of the passions, but also the seat of intelligence. On death, the Spirit of man goes back to God who gives it. Messiah had a command from God to be resurrected as Spirit. This is the meaning of the term my heart waketh. His Spirit was restored to life by command of God. The text then, from verse 3, proclaims the miracle of the resurrection and the subsequent baptism and salvation of the elect.

The text then goes on in verse 2 to say hark my beloved knocketh. The Soncino notes that Seeing that the ladies are sympathetic she tells them her dream. This translation follows the LXX which takes dophek as a separate clause agreeing with dodi, ‘my beloved is knocking’.

The call is to the elect to open to the Messiah. The term for he who knocks at the door is rendered in the Arabic form as Al Tarikh which is the name for the Morning Star. The Surah Al Tarikh is thus rendered in different forms. It is rendered as the Morning Star in Pickthall’s translation while it is rendered the Nightly Visitant by Darwood. It also means He who knocks at the door. The sense of the text is thus identified with Messiah from here and also from Revelation 3:20. Here the Messiah comes in and eats with those who open to him.

The comment that his head is drenched with dew is again a reference to the Nightly Visitant which contains, in the Arabic, a connection with the Morning Star (see also Pickthall). The Morning Star or Day Star, the Light Bearer or Lucifer is the rank of the elohim of this earth, which was held by Satan as anointed guardian cherub, as we know from Ezekiel 28:14 and Isaiah 14:12. This rank is given to Chris, which he shares with the elect (2Pet. 1:19; Rev. 3:27-28; 22:16). The dew also has reference to Judges 6:38 as is noted also from the Soncino.

The commentaries note that he may have come from his mother’s house in the night. It also notes he awaited all evening after his resurrection until the Sunday morning (Jn. 20:1,8-10,16-17) when he ascended into heaven as the wave sheaf offering and then returned that evening (Jn. 20:19).

The text is applied exactly in the Gospels at the last supper. Christ laid aside (tithenai) his garment. This symbolised the laying aside of his life. The term, how could I put it on? shows the miracle of the resurrection through the power of God. Only God could put it on again. The term I had bathed my feet how could I soil them? is a reference to the symbolism of the footwashing of the Lord’s supper done first for Messiah in spikenard. The first instance of the event shows that it is directly related to the forgiveness of sins (Lk. 7:38-50). John 11:2 shows that it was Mary who did this. The incident at John 12:3 was also done by Mary. She anointed his feet with nard in anticipation of his crucifixion. He arrived there six days before the Passover (i.e. 9 Nisan) and on 10 Nisan they gave him a supper and he was anointed. He was thus set aside as the Passover Lamb. He did not defile his feet. He died without blemish as the Passover. The same sense of being without blemish is applied to all who have their feet washed at the Lord’s Supper, through the blood of Messiah. The word for how in this text is a word found only in Esther 8:6. This text has the connotation of how can I let it happen. The word is SHD 346 ’ayeh meaning where? seemingly derived from SHD 335 ‘ay where how or why. The sense is how can it be and the sense of the ongoing impossibility of being placed in that position.

The text shows the return of Messiah from the resurrection. The Soncino gives the meaning as: Hearing her lame excuses for not answering his knock, he departs, and his action causes her anxiety (Rashi). The translation here differs from that of the Soncino which applies the text as My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door. The explanation is given so it would appear that an unbolted door could be opened by inserting the hand in the hole (Isaiah da Trani, Daath Mikra). Others hold that the hole was also used to view and speak to the visitor.

The term hear,t is literally my bowels, which to the ancients were the seat of the emotions (cf. Jer. 31:19; Ps. 40:9).

The commentaries note that when the knocking ceased she became anxious.

Rushing to the door her hands touched the liquid scent with which her beloved had sprinkled the door, [perhaps as a gesture of love, or in pursuance of a custom to anoint the door of a beloved with fragrant spices] (Isaiah da Trani). Some commentators are of the view that she anointed herself with myrrh before retiring for the night (Rashi, Metsudath David).

The real position here is that the beloved was not trying to enter here. He was trying to give the beloved the means of escape from the world system. From the very act of his opening, the beloved was anointed with the spices of the Spirit and freed from her environment. However, she could not yet be united with the lover. He had gone away for an extended period. The search of the beloved commences because she has contact with him only through the Spirit.

This is the period of the Church in the wilderness. The commentaries say [Imagine her grief at not finding him there! The verbs chamak abar (had turned away, was gone) are most expressive, and the omission of the particle ‘and’ reflects her disturbed mind.] (Soncino).

Her soul failed her meant she felt faint (Metsudath David). The qualification when he spoke is significant. Rashi comments: ‘Because he said, "I will not now enter, since thou didst at first refuse to open to me"’. Metsudath David, Isaiah da Trani and Malbim follow this explanation. Akedath Yitschak, however, explains it as past perfect, ‘my soul had failed me when he spoke,’ i.e., when he said, ‘Open to me, my sister, my love’. I did not give his words the proper attention. I did not take them seriously. This is exactly the situation with Judah, the blood sister of Messiah. They did not heed him and thus he went away for the forty Jubilee period, to end the times of the Gentiles and the period of Satan’s rule.

There was no answer from this period. There was no sign given his ministry save the sign of Jonah (see the paper Sign of Jonah and the History of the Reconstruction of the Temple (No. 13)).