Song of Songs 1:7-11 (A Mystery Resolved)

Artwork by Douglass Kallerson

Song of Songs 1:7-11
A Mystery Resolved

(Typed 18 November 2024) For this sermon, I deviated from how I typically use words found within the sermon to give it a title. This title is given because of a resolution to the meaning of complex words found within the verses we will go over.

In fact, some of the words in verse 7 have caused enough speculation concerning their meaning to fill an ocean. I can’t read every commentary on the planet to see if anyone has figured them out, but of those that I read – which cited innumerable other rabbis and scholars – none of them satisfactorily explain the meaning.

In turn, translations follow these scholarly commentaries, repeating what someone guessed was the intent. This is particularly true with one obscure clause that is extremely difficult to explain.

For me, I started sermon typing around 4 am. With only a 20-minute pause to take out the garbage at the mall, I finally finished considering verse 7 at 7:20 am.

After finishing the evaluation, the reason for the endless speculation seems almost impossible to explain. The meaning of the words is as simple to understand as “dinner time.” When you hear that, you rush in and start to eat.

If some other scholar has come to the same conclusion, my hat is off to him. He followed the main rule of biblical interpretation in order to come to his conclusion. The rule is… anyone? Yes! Context. What is the context of what is being said?

Text Verse: “Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word.” John 8:43

Jesus was speaking to the people about Himself. He “proceeded forth and came from God” (John 8:42). This is true also of the words of Scripture. They likewise proceeded forth and came from God.

To understand Jesus’ speech, one must listen to His words. And to understand what the Bible is relaying concerning Jesus’ words, you have to spend time in God’s word. In other words, one must consider the context of what is being said.

To rip words out of context will not lead to understanding but confusion. To insert one’s thoughts into Scripture will change the intent of what has come from God, confusing and obscuring the intent.

When there is an enigma in the word, we have to stop and consider the context. We may or may not figure it out, but at least we won’t be shoving our thoughts into the word when we do.

It is better to say, “I don’t know,” or at least, “I could be wrong, but this is what I think,” than to tell someone something that may not be correct.

In the case of verse 7, probably I would have said, “I don’t know,” if I just read the scholar’s comments. They are all over the place and no comment was any better than any other in explaining them. However, I believe my resolution to the mystery of the words is correct.

When I give it, and assuming it is right, you will think, “Well, yeah, that’s obvious. What was so complicated about that?” It probably won’t even seem like a big deal to you, but it is.

It is a part of God’s word. He is giving us information. When we don’t understand His speech, it is because we are not able to listen to His word. This is “Song the songs.” Thus, the Bible tells us that it is the greatest song ever written.

Have you heard a song a million times, but you still don’t know some of its words? When you finally find out what the words say, you think to yourself, “Oh yeah, I’m so glad to know what they were singing.”

If that is how you feel about an old song on the radio from your high school days, how much happier should you be to understand what the “Song the songs” is telling us? Concerning verse 7, I feel that way.

Let’s get into the sermon. It’s dinner time. A feast of beautiful images is to be found in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. According to Covering (verses 7 & 8)

Tell me, O you whom I love,

As noted, some of the words in verse 7 are extremely complicated, and their actual meaning seems unattainable. Most scholars allegorize them to fit some presupposed notion about one thing or another.

Some take letters and transpose them to form different words that seem to fit their presuppositions. Because of this, such transpositions are then found in various translations. For instance, in his commentary on this verse, Ellicott says –

“The Rabbinical interpretation of this verse is a good instance of the fanciful treatment the book has received: ‘When the time came for Moses to depart, he said to the Lord, “It is revealed to me that this people will sin and go into captivity; show me how they shall be governed and dwell among the nations whose decrees are oppressive as the heat; and wherefore is it they shall wander among the flocks of Esau and Ishmael, who make them idols equal to thee as thy companions?”’”

This utterly inane rabbinical interpretation tells us a couple of things: 1) The rabbis had no idea what the words are telling us, and 2) they also spent their time covering up the sins of their own people.

Idolatry is one of the main reasons why Israel was exiled and dwelt among the nations. The rabbis admit that the people sinned and went into captivity, but then their words completely obscure one of the main sins that caused it.

As for the verse, it begins with: hagidah li sheahava naphshi – “Declare it to me whom loved, my soul.” There is nothing complicated in her words. She is asking her beloved, the one whom her soul loved (the verb is in the perfect aspect), to declare something to her. That something is…

7 (con’t) Where you feed your flock,

eikhah tireh – “Where pasture?” The verb is ra’ah. It signifies tending to a flock. In other words, pasturing. It is quite often translated as the act of shepherding. However, it describes both the act of shepherding by an individual as well as the flock feeding. For example –

“And Shitrai the Sharonite was over the herds that fed [ra’ah] in Sharon, and Shaphat the son of Adlai was over the herds that were in the valleys.” 1 Chronicles 27:29

Therefore, the word pasture is sufficient for both the act of the animal and the conduct of the shepherd.

In this clause, the verb is imperfect. She is asking where he is pasturing his flock. It is out in the land somewhere at the time, and she is curious about where.

The idea of pasturing is frequently turned into metaphor where it describes leaders caring for their people, guiding them, and so forth. For example –

“Then all the tribes of Israel came to David at Hebron and spoke, saying, ‘Indeed we are your bone and your flesh. Also, in time past, when Saul was king over us, you were the one who led Israel out and brought them in; and the Lord said to you, “You shall shepherd [ra’ah] My people Israel, and be ruler over Israel.”’” 2 Samuel 5:1, 2

This state of pasturing is equated to the Lord at times –

“Give ear, O Shepherd [ra’ah – literally “shepherding”] of Israel,
You who lead Joseph like a flock;
You who dwell between the cherubim, shine forth!
Before Ephraim, Benjamin, and Manasseh,
Stir up Your strength,
And come and save us!
Restore us, O God;
Cause Your face to shine,
And we shall be saved!” Psalm 80:1-3

This pasturing or shepherding doesn’t just describe physically tending to the people but also spiritually. The idea continues in the New Testament, where it is used when referring to leaders in a church, such as in Acts 20 –

“Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. 29 For I know this, that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock.” Acts 20:28, 29

It is also used when referring to Jesus, such as in 1 Peter 2:25 –

“For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.”

These are just a few of the New Testament examples that convey this thought. As for the words here in “Song the songs,” this woman is asking where her beloved is pasturing…

7 (con’t) Where you make it rest at noon.

eikhah tarbits batsahorayim – “Where crouch in the double-light?” Saying resting or lying down is the result of the crouching. The word is rabats. It signifies crouching, as when an animal folds its four legs under it in a recumbent fashion.

As such, when the word is used of people, the mental idea should extend to that of an animal that is being shepherded –

“The Lord is my shepherd;
I shall not want.
He makes me to lie down [rabats] in green pastures;
He leads me beside the still waters.
He restores my soul;
He leads me in the paths of righteousness
For His name’s sake.” Psalm 23:1-3

David equates the Lord to a Shepherd of animals and himself to one of His flock. The Lord causes David to fold his legs under him, meaning to rest in the field.

Understanding this, the woman asks where his flocks crouch in the double-light. The word is the plural of tsohar, a window or a light. Thus, it is the double-light, meaning when the sun is at the highest point in the sky. The expanded plural form gives the sense of intense light and, thus, intense heat.

As it is the heat of the day, the heat of the sun is too much for the animals during this time. Thus, one can more fully appreciate David’s words in the 23rd Psalm. He was a shepherd who tended to his father’s flocks –

“And Samuel said to Jesse, ‘Are all the young men here?’ Then he said, ‘There remains yet the youngest, and there he is, keeping the sheep.’
And Samuel said to Jesse, ‘Send and bring him. For we will not sit down till he comes here.’” 1 Samuel 16:11

David understood this type of life and used the concept in metaphor to describe the Lord’s care of him. It is a most tender analogy when understood. He is equating himself to a little lamb being carefully tended to by the Lord.

This woman is asking about her beloved’s flock – where he is pasturing it and where it crouches in the heat of the day. When set side by side, one can see the two lines are not two thoughts but one set in parallel lines –

Where pasture?
Where crouch in the double-light?

With this understood, the words which cause so much anguish to scholars and translators now arrive…

7 (con’t) For why should I be as one who veils herself

The words begin with an abbreviated relative pronoun: shalamah ehyeh k’otyah – “That why become according to covering?” At first, the words seem almost incomprehensible.

The use of this abbreviated relative pronoun in Scripture (she-) is quite rare. It is seen twice in Judges, in the Israelite sections of the books of Kings and also in the Psalms, the Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes.

The first in the Song of Songs was in verse 1:6 (twice) when the woman described herself – “that I swarthy” and “that tanned me.” Here, she says, “That why become (1st person) according to covering.”

The verb atah comes from a primitive root meaning to wrap. Thus, it signifies to cover. To get the words to make sense, various translations say, “one who is veiled,” “one who veils herself,” “like a veiled woman,” etc.

The veiling is then equated to different things such as mourning, the sign of a prostitute (as in Genesis 38), doing something wrong, etc. The speculations about what is being said go on and on. However, the word is a verbal participle and needs to be translated as such, “covering.”

Others, because of the seemingly impossible nature of what is said, argue that letters have been transposed. That is convenient. When a problem arises, we can just emend (to correct by textual alterations) the text to clear things up! This is a short part of a long and difficult commentary from the scholars at Cambridge –

“The Syriac, the Vulgate, and Symm. apparently read, ‘wanderer,’ transposing the letters and making ‛ôtîyyâh into tô‛ iyyâh, the participle of the verb ‘to wander.’ Archdeacon Aglen’s suggestion in Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers, that as the word ‛âtâh in Isaiah 22:17 is given the meaning of ‘erring,’ or ‘wandering about,’ by the Rabbinic commentators, probably the idea they had in their mind was that a person with the head wrapped up has difficulty in finding his way, and thus, even without any transposition of the letters, the word might come to be translated ‘wandering,’ is interesting and plausible. He would translate as one blindfold. This seems the best rendering.”

Through one of two ways of manipulating the intent, they arrive at a word that signifies to wander. Flocks wander, so that must be it! Hence, “to wander after the flocks” (Douay-Rheims), “wander like a prostitute” (NLT), “like a sheep which has gone astray” (Lamsa Bible), “as a stray in the flock of your sheep” (Peshitta Bible), etc.

None of these translations, nor any of the comments I read, align with the context. Without that, the words naturally seem unattainable. However, what was she talking about in the previous verses while using this rare relative pronoun? Her darkened state –

“Black, I, and beautiful, daughters Jerusalem –
According to tents Kedar,
According to curtains Solomon.
6 Not seeing me, that I [she-ani] swarthy,
That tanned [she-shezaphathni] me the sun.
Sons my mother burned in me.
Set me keeping the vineyards.
My vineyard, that to me, not kept.”

She is continuing the thought: “That why [sha-lamah] (I) become according to covering?” She is speaking about her state of darkness still. After that, she says…

7 (con’t) By the flocks of your companions?

Every translation I checked, almost forty of them, follows every other, repeating the same thing again and again. Rather: al edre khaverekha – “Upon flocks your associates?” The word al, meaning upon, over, or above, is used. When it is translated as “by” such as in the words of Psalm 137, it still carries the sense of a downward aspect –

“By the rivers of Babylon,
There we sat down, yea, we wept
When we remembered Zion.” Psalm 137:1

When you sit by the waters, you are actually sitting above the waters. Saying “by” is merely implied because you aren’t sitting in the waters. The misguided idea of saying “by,” as in “next to,” makes it impossible to know what thought the woman is conveying.

She is saying that the animals of their flocks are covered (verbal participle – covering) in dark colorings. This is seen, for example, in Genesis 30 –

“Let me pass through all your flock today, removing from there all the speckled and spotted sheep, and all the brown ones among the lambs, and the spotted and speckled among the goats; and these shall be my wages. 33 So my righteousness will answer for me in time to come, when the subject of my wages comes before you: every one that is not speckled and spotted among the goats, and brown among the lambs, will be considered stolen, if it is with me.” Genesis 30:32, 33

This is what has eluded rabbis, Christian scholars, and translators for thousands of years. And yet, when it is seen, it is perfectly obvious. To paraphrase the entire thought –

“I am black and beautiful, O daughters of Jerusalem –
According to the tents Kedar [I am black],
According to curtains of Solomon [I am beautiful].
6 Don’t look at me like that! That I am swarthy,
Just because the sun tanned me.
You see, the sons of my mother made my skin dark.
They set me as the keeper of the vineyards.
And so my vineyard (meaning my appearance) went unkept (I got dark).

Declare it to me, you whom my soul loves,
Where are you pasturing?
Where are you crouching in the heat of the day?
Lest I become according to covering, (If she doesn’t find him, she will only get darker with the blazing heat of the sun on her, a darkness which is) upon the flocks of your associates.”

She is saying that while he is resting during the heat of the day at the time his flocks also rest, she is out searching for him. Hence, he can retain his light skin. She, on the other hand, will continue to darken as she searches for him.

This sufficiently resolves the mystery of these otherwise unattainable words. It maintains the overall context, and it also requires no fudging of the text. The verbal participle is properly used, which is something that none of the other translations do.

When verse 7 is considered in the context of the rest of Scripture, it is hard not to see a parallel to missions, which then become established areas of churches. Where is the Lord pasturing His flock? In other words, where is the flock at this time, ready to feed? The church wants to know and go there.

It has been in the vineyards (verse 6) which represent various cultural expressions tending to them (missions). But there are flocks out there that belong to the Lord. The church wants to know where in order to participate in what the Lord is doing (pasturing).

The book, “Song the songs,” is the expression of God’s love as detailed in various ways throughout the rest of Scripture. A woman is being prepared as a bride to Solomon, and a church is being prepared as a bride to the Lord.

With that hint of scriptural typology explained, the song continues…

If you do not know, O fairest among women,

im lo ted’i lakh hayapha banashim – “If not know to you, the beautiful in the women.” It is debated who is speaking here. Some think it is the daughters of Jerusalem. Others maintain that it is her beloved. There are no gender indicators to tell which is the case.

Either way, the words are given in response to her question, “Where pasture?” Whoever the speaker is, the words begin the answer and then provide a high compliment, confirming her beauty despite (or because of) her swarthy complexion.

Saying “the beautiful in the women,” is rightly paraphrased as “fairest among women.” Her darkened skin sets her off as more, not less, beautiful. With that noted, the answer to her question is…

8 (con’t) Follow in the footsteps of the flock,

ts’i lakh b’iqvei ha’tson – “Go out, to you, in heel the flock.” The speaker is telling her to follow in the footsteps of the flock. Wherever they take her, just keep following along, and she will find the one she is looking for. Once she finds the location…

8 (con’t) And feed your little goats
Beside the shepherds’ tents.

ur’i eth g’diyothaikh al mishk’noth ha’roim

“And pasture your kids,
Upon tabernacles the pasturing.”

The word translated as kids, g’diyah, is found only here in Scripture. It is the feminine form of g’diy, a kid. She is being instructed to take her flock of female kids, follow along in the footprints of the other shepherds, and then pasture her flocks upon the spot where the others are pasturing.

As a point of speculation, the feminine form may point to the New Testament term translated as children. It is a neuter word in Greek, but Hebrew has no neuter. Thus, to offset the young immature believers, the feminine might be used here. The term children is frequently used in this way in the New Testament –

“My little children, for whom I labor in birth again until Christ is formed in you, 20 I would like to be present with you now and to change my tone; for I have doubts about you.” Galatians 4:19, 20

It is speculation, but it does fit the intent.

How fair is My beloved in My eyes!
With all My affection, I will focus my doting love
Of her extravagant beauty, to her, I will apprise
For among all other women, she is heads above

My heart is set on her, and she shall be Mine
With cords of love, I will draw her unto Me
A bride, radiant and divine
Together forever upon the glassy sea

The song of songs we will sing forever
In bonds of love, unending and pure
This bride is composed of any, whosoever
Such as will be Mine, eternally secure

II. My Querida (verses 9-11)

With the previous thought complete, the words begin a new section. The woman has come into the presence of her beloved, and so he now addresses her…

I have compared you, my love,
To my filly among Pharaoh’s chariots.

Following the KJV, the NKJV has flipped the clauses and otherwise failed to give a reasonable sense of the words: l’susathi b’rikhvei phar’oh dimithikh rayathi

“To my mare, in chariots Pharaoh,
Compared you, my querida.”

Solomon uses metaphor to explain how his eyes find her beauty. His mare is his personal horse. This is the only use of the word susah, mare, in Scripture. It is a feminine form of sus, a horse. Therefore, it is a mare. Of the mare, Clarke says –

“Mares, in preference to horses, were used both for riding and for chariots in the East. They are much swifter, endure more hardship. and will go longer without food, than either the stallion or the gelding.” Adam Clarke

Being the king, it would be the finest mare of all, standing out above the rest. Despite this, some are offended at the comparison of a woman to a horse.

It is a ridiculous sentiment. The number of animal comparisons to humans in Scripture is not small. Though they are often somewhat demeaning, such as being compared to a grasshopper or a brute beast, at times, they are high compliments.

As for the horse, the Lord gives it a lofty and honorable description of it in the Book of Job –

“Have you given the horse strength?
Have you clothed his neck with thunder?
20 Can you frighten him like a locust?
His majestic snorting strikes terror.
21 He paws in the valley, and rejoices in his strength;
He gallops into the clash of arms.
22 He mocks at fear, and is not frightened;
Nor does he turn back from the sword.
23 The quiver rattles against him,
The glittering spear and javelin.
24 He devours the distance with fierceness and rage;
Nor does he come to a halt because the trumpet has sounded.
25 At the blast of the trumpet he says, ‘Aha!’
He smells the battle from afar,
The thunder of captains and shouting.” Job 39:19-25

Saying, “in chariots Pharaoh,” reflects what is said in 1 Kings 10 –

“Also Solomon had horses imported from Egypt and Keveh; the king’s merchants bought them in Keveh at the current price. 29 Now a chariot that was imported from Egypt cost six hundred shekels of silver, and a horse one hundred and fifty; and thus, through their agents, they exported them to all the kings of the Hittites and the kings of Syria.” 1 Kings 10:28, 29

Calling them Pharaoh’s chariots (plural) does not mean the mare was used on various chariots. Rather, it is a way of saying the chariots of Israel were of Egyptian origin, bought from Pharaoh’s realm.

Solomon’s chariot, among all the Egyptian-imported chariots, adorned with his personal mare – the finest of the land – is then said by him to be, “Compared you, my querida.”

Here is a word introduced into Scripture, rayah. It will be used nine times, all in “Song the songs.” It is used once in the verbal reading of Judges 11:37, but not in the written reading. It signifies a female associate. Saying, “my love” is a poor paraphrase.

There are many words that could be used, such as darling, dearest, sweetheart, sweetie pie, pet, honey pie, etc., but these can refer to either a man or a woman depending on the speaker.

However, the Spanish word querida is used only when speaking to a female sweetheart. It is a term of endearment for a man’s beloved or lovable person. Thus, it exactly fits the intent.

In the Philippines, the word is transliterated as kerida, which signifies a married man’s mistress, but that is not the intent here. Of his swarthy querida, he says while probably still thinking of his mare…

10 Your cheeks are lovely with ornaments,

The words are striking but also rare: navu l’khayayikh batorim – “Beautified, your cheeks, in the face-chains.” The word naah, comes from a primitive root meaning “to be at home.” Therefore, by implication, it signifies to be pleasant or beautiful.

When a woman goes out, she puts on stuff to make herself attractive. At home, such may not be the case. Therefore, this is speaking of a woman who is naturally beautiful, even at home, without all the extras. The word is used once in relation to the house of the Lord in Psalm 93:5 and once more in Isaiah 52 –

“How beautiful [naah] upon the mountains
Are the feet of him who brings good news,
Who proclaims peace,
Who brings glad tidings of good things,
Who proclaims salvation,
Who says to Zion,
‘Your God reigns!’” Isaiah 52:7

In this case, the word naah is in the perfect aspect. Thus, her cheeks are “beautified.” Solomon next says that they are batorim, in the face-chains. The word tor is seen only four times, twice in Esther and twice here.

It signifies a succession. It is something that occurs in an interval. In Esther, it speaks of Esther’s “turn” to go into the king as a virgin of the harem. There was a succession of virgins, and she was next. A great deal of speculation is given as to what these face chains are, but the context gives the meaning.

These are on her cheeks. That is all we need to know. Though nobody translates it this way, it is the Mideastern and Indian fashion called a face chain. There are innumerable styles of them, but they can go from a single chain crossing the face to an entire facial covering hanging from the forehead down.

Solomon’s horse would have hangings that looked like these dangling on it as well to accentuate its curves and to highlight the king’s prominence among all other horse and chariot riders. Next, he says…

10 (con’t) Your neck with chains of gold.

Rather: tsavarekh bakharuzim – “Your nape in the beads.” The word tsavar is generally associated with the back of the neck, the nape. It is derived from tsur, to bind or besiege. For example, when a yoke is placed on someone, it is on the back of the neck.

The word kharuz is also used, and it is only found here in Scripture. It comes from an unused root, signifying to perforate. As such, it refers to beads of pearls or stones that have been pierced.

Again, it is likely that Solomon’s horse would have such elaborate ornamentation on it. The lines then are set in parallel –

1) “To my mare, in chariots Pharaoh,
Compared you, my querida.”
2) Beautified, your cheeks in the face-chains,
Your nape in the beads.

Next, the words return to the plural…

11 We will make you ornaments of gold
With studs of silver.

torei zahav naaseh lakh im n’qudoth ha’kaseph

“Face-chains gold make (1st pers. pl.) to you,
With speckles the silver.”

It is the last use of tor, face-chains, in the Bible. The plural is because of the chorus of women as seen in verse 4. The king was captured by the beauty of the woman. That beauty was accentuated by the face-chains. But now, these women call out that they will make her even more alluring to the king by replacing her common face chains with those of gold that are speckled with silver.

As for the speckles, the noun n’quddah, is found only here. It is a feminine word derived from the same source as the adjective naqod, spotted. Thus, it refers to speckles. The face chains of gold with speckles of silver are intended to drive Solomon absolutely bonkers.

If John Gill’s assessment from last week is correct, meaning that the plural and the singular feminine voices are one, as seems possible, then this is speaking of an entity that is singular but composed of many. As he said –

We; both I thy spouse, and the virgins my companions. And this change of numbers teaches us that the spouse in this book is one great body, consisting of many members, of whom therefore he speaks sometimes in the singular, and sometimes in the plural number.” John Gill

If this is correct, isn’t this final verse what the people in the church should be doing for the church? As the harem of women promises to adorn this woman, so we should be adorning the church with beauty in preparation for joining with the Lord.

Each person should be willing to do his or her utmost for the cause of the whole. Unfortunately, this is not always the situation. Many individual churches place little emphasis on the thought of beautifying the church. Some seem to want to do the opposite.

But that is their choice. As for this church, we can and should be willing to adorn the overall church with right doctrine, sound believers, increasing faith, joy in our salvation, and so forth. The day is coming when the time for our union with the Lord will arrive.

It would be a shame if we are presented without having offered anything of ourselves. The “Song the songs” is the greatest song of all because it provides shadows and details for us concerning the love of God in Christ.

When it is read on Passover by the Jews each year, they still remain blind to the overall redemptive plan God has set forth. But once in Christ, the veil is lifted, and our eyes can see Scripture for what it really is, meaning the most intimate love letter ever penned.

As love sums up the “Song the songs,” it sums up the whole tenor of Scripture. God in Christ! What a marvelous thing He has done to bring us back to Himself. Praise God for His wonderful, loving hand upon us because of Jesus.

Closing Verse: “Let all those who seek You rejoice and be glad in You;
Let such as love Your salvation say continually,
‘The Lord be magnified!’” Psalm 40:16

Next Week: Song of Songs 1:12-17 She deserves a hip-hip-hoorayda… (My Querida) (4th Song of Songs sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He alone is the perfect example of love – untarnished, unblemished, and completely pure and holy. He offers this love to you. So, follow Him, live for Him, and trust Him, and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

Song of Songs 1:7-11 (CG)

7 Declare it to me whom loved, my soul –
Where pasture?
Where crouch in the double-light?
That why become according to covering,
Upon flocks your associates?
8 If not know to you, the beautiful in the women,
Go out, to you, in heel the flock,
And pasture your kids,
Upon tabernacles the pasturing.
9 “To my mare, in chariots Pharaoh,
Compared you, my querida.”
10 Beautified, your cheeks in the face-chains,
Your nape in the beads.
11 Face-chains gold make to you,
With speckles the silver.

Song of Songs 1:7-11 (NKJV)

Tell me, O you whom I love,
Where you feed your flock,
Where you make it rest at noon.
For why should I be as one who veils herself
By the flocks of your companions?
If you do not know, O fairest among women,
Follow in the footsteps of the flock,
And feed your little goats
Beside the shepherds’ tents.
I have compared you, my love,
To my filly among Pharaoh’s chariots.
10 Your cheeks are lovely with ornaments,
Your neck with chains of gold.
11 We will make you ornaments of gold
With studs of silver.

 

 

Song of Songs 1:4-6 (Draw Me!)

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson

Song of Songs 1:4-6
Draw Me!

(Typed 11 November 2024 – Veteran’s Day). From time to time, I bring up some odd doctrine that is floating around out there in Christian circles. One such doctrine is that of the supposed Black Hebrew Israelites.

Like the Mormons, they claim that they are descendants of the biblical Israelites. But they go further and claim that the Hebrews of the Bible were actually black. They say that those in Israel today are Edomites who have no right to the land.

By pulling verses out of context, they have formed an entire theology that has nothing to do with biblical or historical reality. And yet, if you take them to the Bible to show them where they are wrong, it is like dealing with people in any other cult. They will not only fail to see reason, but they will also get belligerent with you.

Quite often, these people are violent, not only in their theology but in their conduct. But what they propose goes beyond the single idea of religion. It is more a set identifier like being Jewish is. Being Jewish is what identifies Jews before anything else.

Likewise, their idea is that you can be a Black Hebrew Israelite and be a member of any religion. The main thing for them is their blackness and that they supposedly descend from the biblical Jews of the Bible.

The utterly ridiculous nature of the claim is found in several books of the Bible where the Jews are identified, quite clearly, as being light-skinned. At times, it is even contrasted to being dark-skinned to make the point more relevant.

Text Verse: “I drew them with gentle cords,
With bands of love,
And I was to them as those who take the yoke from their neck.
I stooped and fed them.” Hosea 11:4

In Hosea, the Lord says He drew Israel. In the verses today, the woman speaking to her beloved calls out for him to draw her. Then she will speak about a perceived defect that she possessed, about which she is unashamed.

What is it that will cause the Lord to draw people to Himself? Is it skin color? Is it national or cultural status? Or is it simply that we are human, and the Lord calls us because of that? The Bible never speaks of the Lord drawing alligators or birds. Rather, animals are excluded.

Why would some people, like the Mormons or the Black Hebrew Israelites, claim something that they obviously are not? The main reason must be that people think that by co-opting some trait or another God will like them more.

But that is entirely unnecessary. How you look, how many fingers you have, the school you went to, the culture you belong to, or any other category that could separate you within humanity cannot affect how God will perceive you, acknowledge you, or favor you.

This is true with being a Jew or a Gentile. It is true with being black, white, red, yellow, brown, purple, or blue (although if you are one of the latter two, you should probably go to the doctor). These things don’t matter to God.

There is just one thing that causes God to, which is how you respond to the call of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Everything else is unimportant. You are a human. There is no need to try to coopt something in humanity that you don’t have. Just be yourself and come to Christ. In doing so, God will favor you.

This is a certain truth that is to be found in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. They Love You (verse 4)

Draw me away!

mashkheni – “Draw me!” The verb mashakh here is in the form of an imperative. In essence it is like a positive command or instruction. Hence, the use of the exclamation point for effect.

It is an appeal by the woman to be drawn into the love expressed in the previous verses. She desires loving intimacy with the man and expresses that she wants him to make it happen.

How different that is from the Calvinistic view of being called by God. They stand firmly (and incorrectly) on John 6:44 claiming that man has no choice or free will, in the process of the relationship that is established between God and man –

“Jesus therefore answered and said to them, ‘Do not murmur among yourselves. 44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.’” John 6:43, 44

Removing Jesus’ words from the surrounding context, Calvinism says that the process is initiated by God, must be continued (actually forced) by God, and is then completed by God, at which point the individual can exercise free will.

This is known as monergism, coming from mono, one, and erg, work. God alone works in the process of salvation, apart from any action (meaning inherent faith) by man and apart from any will in man.

In essence, as if God were speaking, “There is a person who I want to save. I will actively draw him to Myself, change him apart from his will, and this will cause him to call on Me to be saved.”

To understand this, it says in John 3:3 –

“Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.’”

Calvinism teaches that being born again is not the same as being saved. Rather, it is a step in the process. God decides who He will save. He then regenerates that person to believe (he is born again). The person then believes and is saved.

Thus, they add an unwarranted step into their doctrine of salvation, meaning the free will of believing is granted by God, but only after God gives new birth.

The Bible never speaks of such a thing. It is contrary to the entire nature of what Scripture says. Rather, being born again is equated with being saved, not a step in the process of salvation. Using John 6:44 in the manner Calvinists do ignores the context of what Jesus was saying.

In John 5, Jesus spoke of the witnesses that testify of Him, four in particular. The witness was to Israel, the stewards of the oracles of God. In that passage, Jesus says –

“If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. 32 There is another who bears witness of Me, and I know that the witness which He witnesses of Me is true. 33 You have sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth34 Yet I do not receive testimony from man, but I say these things that you may be saved. 35 He was the burning and shining lamp, and you were willing for a time to rejoice in his light. 36 But I have a greater witness than John’s; for the works which the Father has given Me to finish—the very works that I do—bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me. 37 And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form. 38 But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe. 39 You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me40 But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.” John 5:31-40

John the Baptist came to fulfill the role and ministry of Elijah by testifying to the coming of Christ. When he came, he witnessed to Israel, but so did the words of Scripture which told of his coming –

“Remember the Law of Moses, My servant,
Which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel,
With the statutes and judgments.
Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet
Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.
And he will turn
The hearts of the fathers to the children,
And the hearts of the children to their fathers,
Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.” Malachi 4:4-6

The amount of drawing of Israel to Jesus is incomprehensible, and yet, they were not drawn to Him. They rejected (implying free will) the testimony of John –

“And when all the people heard Him, even the tax collectors justified God, having been baptized with the baptism of John. 30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.” Luke 7:29, 30

They rejected the works of Jesus which testified to who He is. They rejected the testimony of the Father who sent Him and who spoke of Him in their own oracles. They rejected the words of those oracles which were given by God through Moses, and which were then built upon by the prophets who were under the Law of Moses throughout the years –

“I do not receive honor from men. 42 But I know you, that you do not have the love of God in you. 43 I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive. 44 How can you believe, who receive honor from one another, and do not seek the honor that comes from the only God? 45 Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you—Moses, in whom you trust. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” John 5:41-47

God the Father did draw these people through the Scriptures, but they – by an act of free will – rejected what those writings revealed.

The woman speaking to her love says, “Draw me!” She wants to be drawn, stating it as an imperative. And what does Jesus say in John 12? It is the call for His people to express their free will in a similar manner –

“‘Now My soul is troubled, and what shall I say? “Father, save Me from this hour”? But for this purpose I came to this hour. 28 Father, glorify Your name.’
Then a voice came from heaven, saying, ‘I have both glorified it and will glorify it again.’
29 Therefore the people who stood by and heard it said that it had thundered. Others said, ‘An angel has spoken to Him.’
30 Jesus answered and said, ‘This voice did not come because of Me, but for your sake31 Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out. 32 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.’ 33 This He said, signifying by what death He would die.” John 12:27-33

In John 12, God the Father again witnessed, as did the Scriptures where these things are a recorded witness. The work of the Son, His being lifted up, likewise witnesses. These are what “draw” us to God. But we have to 1) hear the word, and 2) be willing to be drawn.

A person who never hears the message of Jesus will never be drawn. A person who comes to Scripture with the intent of tearing it apart or attempting to prove it is false will not be drawn unless he is willing to accept that he could be wrong. Like the leaders of Israel, the free will of such a person has set itself against the witnesses God has provided.

However, if a person hears the word, he can be drawn. If he comes to Scripture and says, “If this is truly Your word, draw me to Yourself through it,” then the witnesses can be effective. As Scripture hinges on the cross of Jesus Christ, it is through the cross that He draws all men to Himself.

The call by the woman, “Draw me!” is an indication that she longs, even demands, to be drawn. Her free will is what allows her to call out to be drawn. The “Song the songs” is titled as it is because it is a song explaining the greatest expression of love, the cross of Jesus Christ.

We are learning how to appropriate what that act signifies through the words of the woman, “Draw me!” In the introduction to the book last week, I said, “Seeing these parallels, and understanding that the Song of Songs is read during the Passover each year, we can and should look for a suitable explanation as to why this is so.”

The words of the woman tell us why the book is read during the Passover. It is because the Passover anticipates the cross of Jesus Christ –

“Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for usTherefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.” 1 Corinthians 5:6-8

Jesus said that when He was raised up He would draw all men to Himself. That means that the cross, His crucifixion, is how that would happen. This drawing would be based on an act of free will by those who hear of it.

Above all, the “Song the songs” is a book about the process of finding the intimate love with God that is possible through His cross. When that is found…

4 (con’t) We will run after you.

The words contain a cohortative: akharekha narutsah – “After you, we shall run.” The words have gone from the singular, “Draw me!” to the plural, “…we shall run.” Various suggestions are given to explain this.

It may be the woman alone speaking in the plural out of modesty. It may be a chorus of the daughters of Jerusalem witnessing the love spectacle. John Gill interestingly mixes the two thoughts and says –

We; both I thy spouse, and the virgins my companions. And this change of numbers teaches us that the spouse in this book is one great body, consisting of many members, of whom therefore he speaks sometimes in the singular, and sometimes in the plural number.” John Gill

Either way, the intent is clear. In calling out to be drawn, there is the free will acknowledgment and the pursuit of the man will result.

Imagine a person standing on a mountain, looking out at the majesty of the panorama before him, knowing that a great and loving God had to have put it all together. He calls out, “I don’t know who You are or how to find You, but draw me to You! If You do, I will run after You.”

It could be that he is there alone and calls it out in the plural: “I know that if you draw me, we will run after you,” meaning, “I and everyone I tell will run after you.”

It could be that there are people with him, his family for example. They hear his words and they all call out, “We will run after you.”

Or it could be that there are people with the man and he speaks for them, knowing what they would also do, “Draw me, and we (all) will run after you.”

The point, regardless of which scenario is correct, is that there is a desire to be called and a willingness to then respond to the call.

As a side note, many scholars and translations since the time of Luther have diverted from the structure of the Hebrew to something like, “Draw me after you and let us run together!” (NASB 1995).

This would be redundant. The words “Draw me!” imply “after you” or “to you.” The reason for this incorrect change is explained by Cambridge –

“…it is difficult to see who are meant by we. By taking the words as suggested we get the maiden and her deliverer as subjects, and the next clause then does not require to be taken as a hypothetical clause, as it must be if after thee is connected with run.”

So, let us change the word of God because it is difficult. That is convenient. But the words are sufficiently understood when the Subject of the intent behind them, meaning God in Christ, is understood.

At this point, we are not seeing typology, but rather the expression of perfect love as God intends us to see it when we consider the words in light of Jesus. We may not experience perfect love among ourselves, but we can hope for it when drawn by the perfect expression of God’s love. In being drawn, we will run after Him. In so doing…

4 (con’t) The king has brought me into his chambers.

heviani hamelekh khadarav – “Brought me, the king, his chambers.” The man, heretofore unidentified, is now noted as “the king.” Thus, it speaks of Solomon as noted in verse 1.

The substance of the words is debated. Ellicott, in agreement with others, says the words are –

“…in accordance with a common Hebrew idiom, where an hypothesis is expressed by a simple perfect or future without a particle … to be understood, “Even should the king have brought me into his chambers.”

The reason for this supposition is so that the coming clauses, again going from singular to plural, make sense. But there is nothing to suggest this. The words are simple and direct. The king has brought the woman into his chambers and she is elated by the honor.

Without overextending the intent of the words, what is said is not unlike that of Ephesians 2 –

“But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesusthat in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.” Ephesians 2:4-8

A call to be drawn has been expressed, followed by a note that those who are called will run after their loved one. In response to that, the woman is brought into the chambers of the king. This is what happens to believers. As soon as the person receives Jesus, he is spiritually raised up and seated in the heavenly places, represented by the chambers of the king.

With the action taken by the king, the words again go from the singular to the plural. And they are again highlighted by cohortative verbs…

4 (con’t) We will be glad and rejoice in you.

Both verbs are cohortative: nagilah v’nishm’kha bakh – “We shall twirl and we shall rejoice in you.” The word gil comes from a primitive root meaning to spin around. This is an act caused by any strong emotion, but it is generally expressed in joy. In Psalm 2, that is probably not the case –

“Serve Yehovah in fear and twirl in trembling” (CG).

In the case of those now speaking, however, it is a twirling of joy. The words “in you” are masculine. And so, we have the same idea as that expressed in the first two clauses. There is the woman speaking in the singular followed by a plural chorus addressing the king. It leaves us with the same possibilities expressed before.

Regardless of the actual “who” of the song, it is hard to not see at least the possibility of the singular representing an entity expressed in a plural, as noted by John Gill. If so, it mirrors the state of the church where a singular is also expressed as a plural.

4 (con’t) We will remember your love more than wine.

The verb is again cohortative: nazkirah dodekha miyayin – “We shall remember your loves from wine.” The word “from” is rightly expressed as “more than.” Hebrew often uses the “m” prefix as a comparative, which is similar to how we might say, “From all the women in the world, you are the most beautiful.”

In this case, as in verse 2, the word loves is plural and signifies loving affections, like his kisses. His affections, bestowed upon the woman, are remembered more than wine (which is set forth as an example of that which is memorable).

Thus, to understand the meaning of what is being conveyed, refer back to the comments about verse 2. Because of the king’s loving affections and their superlatively desirable nature…

4 (con’t) Rightly do they love you.

Rather: mesharim ahevukha – “Evennesses – they loved you.” The noun meshar comes from the verb yashar which means to be straight or even. Thus, it means evenness. However, here, and at all other times, it is given in the plural – evennesses. Thus, if taking it adverbially, it would signify “rightly.”

The words complete the pentastich and the clause is set in parallel to the ending clause of the previous pentastich which formed verses 2 and 3 –

“Upon thus, maidens love you.”
Evennesses – they loved you.”

As before, the plural may simply be the woman referring to people in general and thus actually about herself –

Verse 3 – Because of the things I just expressed, maidens love you. I am a maiden, and this is why I love you.
Verse 4 – This is why they rightly loved you. I am a maiden and this is why I have loved you.

I know You are there, so draw me unto You
Show me the way that knowing You can be done
When I find that out, this is what I will do:
I will come speedily. After You, I will run

My will is that I know You perfectly
In my imperfect state, can it be done?
You can make it possible. I know you can, surely
And when You do, after You I will run

I have heard the word set forth by You
The word about the giving of Your Son
In Him is perfect love, unfailing and true
And so, because of Him, after You I will run

II. Keeping the Vineyards (verses 5 & 6)

am dark, but lovely,
O daughters of Jerusalem,

sh’khorah ani v’navah b’noth y’rushalim – “Black, I, and beautiful, daughters Jerusalem.” The word shakhor signifies black. But the woman is speaking figuratively. Thus, though not literal, saying dark gets the idea across. The woman is of Israel and, therefore, she is naturally light to olive-skinned. This is evident from verse 6.

The thought is similar to that of Lamentations 4 –

“Her Nazirites were brighter than snow
And whiter than milk;
They were more ruddy in body than rubies,
Like sapphire in their appearance.
Now their appearance is blacker than soot;
They go unrecognized in the streets;
Their skin clings to their bones,
It has become as dry as wood.” Lamentations 4:7, 8

The Nazirite’s whiteness was a point of exaltation, but their appearance as soot reflected the state of God’s disapproval of the people, including the once lofty Nazirites.

However, this woman now states that she is black and beautiful, not being ashamed of her darkened state. And more, she proclaims this to the daughters of Jerusalem, as if it is actually a point of boasting. They are city girls who reveled in the light skin they possessed.

And yet, despite her blackness, the reason for which will be explained in verse 6, she proclaims her beauty with boldness.

In this, there is an unnatural state in which the woman is found. And yet, she has been the object of affection of the king. The parallel to the Lord’s redeemed is notable. Despite having the stain of sin, believers are accepted by God.

As with Christ who came in the likeness of men meaning fallen man (Philippians 2:7), even though He was not fallen, we walk in the world with the appearance of fallen man even though we are the Lord’s redeemed and are no longer being imputed sin (2 Corinthians 5:19).

The favor of the king, regardless of outer appearance, is what matters. Thus, the woman could say she was black and yet lovely. Likewise, we can say that we are stained with sin and yet redeemed by the Lord. As for her blackness, she next says it is…

5 (con’t) Like the tents of Kedar,

k’ahole qedar – “According to tents Kedar.” Kedar was a son of Ishmael, as noted in Genesis 25:13. The name Qedar means dark, coming from qadar, to be dark or gloomy or to mourn. As such, he was probably an especially dark person.

At some point, this line of Ishmael took up the Bedouin style of living, dwelling in dark tents made from black goat hair. To this day, the Bedouins live in these same black tents which stand out against the surrounding sands.

The psalmist equates these same tents of Kedar to a state of gloom in his life –

“Woe is me, that I dwell in Meshech,
That I dwell among the tents of Kedar!
My soul has dwelt too long
With one who hates peace.
am for peace;
But when I speak, they are for war.” Psalm 120:5-7

It is debated if the words of the previous clause are to be taken sequentially in parallel thoughts or whether they stand together. The woman had said, “Black, I, and beautiful.”

Does the black of the tents describe the first part of that clause only: Black, I? If so, then the “beautiful” is reserved for the next clause. If not, then the tents of Kedar are both dark and beautiful.

If she is only speaking of black here, then her previous words would mean something like, “I am ugly and beautiful at the same time. First, I am ugly like the tents of Kedar.” Either way, she equates her blackness to these tents, boasting in the color rather than finding shame. Next, that boast is raised to an even higher level with her next words…

5 (con’t) Like the curtains of Solomon.

kirioth sh’lomoh – “According to curtains Solomon.” If this is only referring to the word beautiful, then she has made a contrast –

Black – According to the tents of Kedar.
And beautiful – According to the curtains of Solomon.

If not, then she has made a comparison –

Black, I, and beautiful – According to both the tents Kedar (a supposed negative) and the curtains Solomon (a contrasting positive).

Without knowing what Solomon’s curtains looked like, it would be hard to be dogmatic about this. However, because of the parallelism found in the song, I think she is making a contrast. Otherwise, using only one comparison would be necessary. By having two, it appears she is making contrasting parallel thoughts.

Either way, however, she acknowledges both and is unashamed of her darkness. Despite this, she next says…

Do not look upon me, because I am dark,

al tiruni sheani sh’kharkhoreth – “Not seeing me, that I swarthy.” The idea behind her words appears to be, “Don’t look down on me because I am swarthy.” She uses a word found only here in Scripture, sh’kharkhoreth. It is a diminutive form of the word used in the previous verse.

She has unashamedly acknowledged that she is black. Now, she admonishes those who behold her not to look down on her because of her swarthiness. She cannot help her appearance…

6 (con’t) Because the sun has tanned me.

sheshzaphathni ha’shemesh – “That tanned me the sun.” This tells us that she is naturally light-skinned. She uses the word shazaph, to tan. Despite being swarthy, she is not naturally, and would have been recognized as such. Thus, this is not an indictment on being naturally dark-skinned. Rather, it would be considered a complaint against a light-skinned female who allowed her skin to darken.In such a case, it might be thought, “What? She isn’t happy with her natural skin?” It is a thought common in the world, such as Michael Jackson who wanted to be white while Rachel Dolezal pretended to be black. In the case of this woman, she doesn’t want anyone to think this is so. Rather…

6 (con’t) My mother’s sons were angry with me;

Rather: b’ne imi nikharu vi – “Sons my mother burned in me.” Because it says mother rather than father, innumerable scholars say that these are stepbrothers or half-brothers from a different mother. There is nothing to substantiate this. The Bible elsewhere uses this terminology –

“Let peoples serve you,
And nations bow down to you.
Be master over your brethren,
And let your mother’s sons bow down to you.
Cursed be everyone who curses you,
And blessed be those who bless you!” Genesis 27:29

“And Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law, ‘Go, return each to her mother’s house. The Lord deal kindly with you, as you have dealt with the dead and with me.’” Ruth 1:8

In the case of this verse, Lange rightly says, “like a true Hebrew daughter she is in the habit of denominating everything after her mother.”

As for the words about her brothers, every translation follows the thought of the NKJV, saying something like they were angry with her, incensed at her, or strove with her. However, the word kharar is used eleven times in the Bible and this would be the only time it had that meaning.

It simply means to burn. It is true that other similar words (e.g. kharah – to burn) can be figuratively applied to anger, but 1) why not use that more common word, and so, 2) she may simply be saying, “My brothers caused my skin to burn, darkening it.” If not, there is a huge void in her statement, leaving out the reason for their anger.

She has been using figurative language, including metaphor, concerning herself. There is no reason to assume she is not doing the same here. When something burns, it chars and blackens. In the case of her brothers, they put her out in the sun and caused her to burn. This happened because…

6 (con’t) They made me the keeper of the vineyards,

samuni noterah eth hak’ramim – “Set me keeping the vineyards.” This explains the actions of the brothers. It is not that they were angry with her. Instead, it may be that they were just too lazy to do their job and had her do it instead.

No matter what, she was placed in the role of tending the vineyards by them. This explains the reason for her having been darkened by the sun. Her unapologetic nature concerning this state is because she assumed a lead role in her home that caused it to come about.

Concerning the vineyard, in Scripture, it represents the cultural side of humanity. There are various vineyards that represent various cultures. As such, one can make a valid comparison to the mission-directed nature of the church where the various vineyards of the world, that should have been tended to by Israel, are given to the church to tend.

They failed to respect the owner of the vineyard and thus had it taken from them (Luke 20:16). But this woman, having been sent to tend to the vineyards next says…

*6 (fin) But my own vineyard I have not kept.

karmi sheli lo natar’ti – “My vineyard, that to me, not kept.” The plain sense of the words is that she is now speaking of herself. Because she has been tending to other vineyards, she has not had time to tend to herself.

The implication, however, is that she carefully tended to the other vineyards she was set over. This is what brought about her blackened skin and she asks to not be looked down on because of it. As we will see, her beloved does not hold it against her.

Although we often look at what is out of the ordinary as defective, bad, odd, unsophisticated, etc., we can turn around our thoughts about such things and look at them as positives.

A person may have been shot or burned during battle. If so, we might look away in revulsion. But if we change our attitude, we may say, “His wounds reflect his great character. He charged a hill by himself, saved dozens of men, and secured victory in the battle.”

A person may say, “My wife has had too many children and her body isn’t nice like it used to be.” Or he could turn it around and say, “My wife has borne and raised eight children. Isn’t she beautiful from all of that effort?”

It can be hard to change our views about things, finding positives where we would normally find negatives, but it can be done. In looking at imperfections as their own types of perfections because of what they represent, we can realign our thinking and find good in what we would otherwise find bad.

That is what God has done with us. We are so filled with imperfection that it is surprising He would even consider us. And yet, in our imperfection, He still sent Jesus, understanding that in our failings, He can still be exalted.

And someday, even our imperfections will be removed. We will stand before Him in a way we cannot even imagine at this time. That will only come about if we are His. So let me tell you how that is possible…

Closing Verse: “Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as He is, so are we in this world.” 1 John 4:17

Next Week: Song of Songs 1:7-11 We will get the enigma resolved… (A Mystery Resolved) (3rd Song of Songs sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He alone is the perfect example of love – untarnished, unblemished, and completely pure and holy. He offers this love to you. So, follow Him, live for Him, and trust Him, and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

Song of Songs 1:4-6 (CG)

4 Draw me! –

After you, we shall run.

Brought me, the king, his chambers.
We shall twirl and we shall rejoice in you.
We shall remember your loves from wine.
Evennesses – they loved you.

5 “Black, I, and beautiful, daughters Jerusalem –
According to tents Kedar,
According to curtains Solomon.
6 Not seeing me, that I swarthy,
That tanned me the sun.
Sons my mother burned in me.
Set me keeping the vineyards.
My vineyard, that to me, not kept.

Song of Songs 1:4-6 (NKJV)

Draw me away!

We will run after you.

The king has brought me into his chambers.

We will be glad and rejoice in you.

We will remember your love more than wine.

Rightly do they love you.

am dark, but lovely,
O daughters of Jerusalem,
Like the tents of Kedar,
Like the curtains of Solomon.
Do not look upon me, because I am dark,
Because the sun has tanned me.
My mother’s sons were angry with me;
They made me the keeper of the vineyards,
But my own vineyard I have not kept.

 

 

 

 

Song of Songs 1:1-3 (The Kisses of His Mouth)

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson

Song of Songs 1:1-3
The Kisses of His Mouth

(Typed 4 November 2024) While typing this sermon, as always on Monday morning, I had to stop for a few minutes and go to the mall to take out the trash. No sooner had I gotten into the car than the guy on the radio started explaining various ways our lives may be expressed through our actions.

He started by talking about what our priorities are. The things we do and the things we seek after will, in turn, reflect our priorities. If we are seeking worldly things like fame, fortune, fast cars, etc., then the world is our priority.

If we aren’t going to church, our lack of priority toward the Lord who told us to meet and fellowship is revealed. The same is true with reading the Bible, sharing our faith, and so forth. After saying this, the radio host then used this train of thought to lead into some of the prayer requests that had been received at the station.

One was from a lady who had been married for 22 years. They had children through the marriage. However, the husband told his wife that he had lost his love for her. The marriage was no longer what he wanted, and he was leaving.

The Bible teaches that this man’s priorities towards his wife, his children, and the Lord are skewed. He is a misdirected soul and unless he wakes up and changes his ways, others will have to pay the price for his flawed choices. He is one of billions of examples in human existence of a person with imperfect love.

Text Verse: “Love never fails.” 1 Corinthians 13:8

One might ask, “If love never fails, then how can there be imperfect love?” Such a question fails to understand the difference between perfect love and imperfect love, something based on the Source of the love. This is why 1 Corinthians 13:8 more precisely says, “The love never fails.”

Perfect love is love that refers to the source of the love, even if it doesn’t fully define Him and His perfections. Unlike Him, humans are imperfect, so perfect love cannot define our love or be displayed by a human. However, the Bible says, God is love (literally: The God is love). It defines His nature as one of His unchanging attributes.

However, this equation cannot be turned around to say, “Love is the God,” as if love is the only thing that defines God. Nor can it say, “The Love is God,” as if a particular thing, love in this case, is God. The way John has written his statement leaves us with just one possible proper translation with one possible understanding.

We, as humans, love imperfectly. If we loved perfectly, then we would never fail in our state of love. So when Paul says, “love never fails,” he is speaking of love that is truly love. If we love someone and never fail to love them, then that is love that never fails.

However, we can fail to love, even when we love a person. But God, who is love, will never fail to love. His perfection means His love is perfect and unfailing. Obviously, this means to the objects of His affection. God is love. That doesn’t change, but we can change in relation to Him so that He cannot love us or what we do.

There is nothing contradictory in this. As noted, God is not defined by love only. He is also just, righteous, holy, etc. These attributes produce a tension in how He responds to us. It is a tension that can only be relieved through the cross of Jesus Christ.

In Christ, God’s righteousness is granted to His people. Tension resolved. In Christ, His love is demonstrated toward us and can be lavished upon us. Tension resolved. In Christ, we are made holy. Again, tension resolved. This applies to all of God’s attributes.

In Christ, none of His attributes are in tension with any other. The tension is resolved, allowing a full and perfect expression of each to be directed toward us. The Bible uses the term “in Christ” again and again. This is how that tension is resolved. We still sin. We still love imperfectly. We still don’t deserve God’s grace or mercy.

And yet, because we are in Jesus through our faith, we now participate in the perfect, eternal fellowship that exists between Him and the Father.

The first words of the Song of Songs form an adamant assertion. As this is so, our task should be to try to find out why the assertion is made and what is behind it. This is what we will attempt to do as we go through this wonderful book.

Imagine being the wife who has loved her husband and raised his children suddenly being told she isn’t what he wants anymore. She called in for prayer that he would change his mind. Imperfect her is still in love with imperfect him.

We are living in a world of imperfection, and yet, we can participate in what is perfect while we are here. The way we do so is found in the Person of Jesus Christ. Such a marvelous truth is to be found in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. The Song of Songs, an Introduction

Name: The Song of Songs, or the Song of Solomon, gets its name from the first line of the book, shir ha’shirim asher lish’lomoh – “Song the songs which to Solomon.”

The words “Song the songs” are idiomatic. In the tabernacle, there was the holy of holies, “the Most Holy Place.” The words King of kings are equivalent to, “the greatest of all kings.” Saying, “Lord of lords” or “heaven of the heavens” speaks of the most superlative or highest of each.

As such, saying, “Song the songs” is a way of stating that this is the greatest of all songs. It is the song that excels all other songs in what it portrays and conveys. It is a majestic claim concerning words that are, at times, very difficult to translate, understand, and comprehend.

Author and Dating: Despite saying “which to Solomon” often translated as “of Solomon,” “which is Solomon’s,” or something similar, whether Solomon is actually the author or not is unknown. This is simply a fact, but it does no good to argue against him being the author. In 1 Kings 4:32, it says that Solomon “spoke three thousand proverbs, and his songs were one thousand and five.”

Therefore, it is possible this is one of his songs. However, when Solomon is mentioned in this book, it is usually as someone who is distant from the narrative. This is not a disqualifying consideration though. At times, Solomon is even somewhat idolized in how he is portrayed. Despite this, 8:12 has the female voice speaking directly to Solomon.

As such, even if he is not the author, it is possible that he oversaw the compilation of the poem or that it was written to him, as the opening line may suggest with the words “which to Solomon.” Regardless, the dating of the book appears to be contemporary with his rule. Therefore, it was probably written between 970 to 931 B.C.

Style of writing: The book is formed from Hebrew poetry focusing on romantic love between a young man and a woman. Because of the sexually explicit nature of some of the contents, many scholars over the centuries have shied away from analyzing it or even agreeing with its inclusion in the canon of Scripture.

So difficult are the words, and so explicit are some of the contents, that Adam Clarke said, “To conclude: I advise all young ministers to avoid preaching on Solomon’s Song.” So much for 2 Timothy 3:16, 17!

When such instances are detailed, they will be considered without shying away from what is presented. Because the words are a part of Scripture, they are to be considered without timidity.

As for the main actors, verse 1:7 reveals the man in the poem is a shepherd. The next verse reveals the woman is a shepherdess. They express their love for one another and, as just noted, their desires go so far as being sexual in nature. The use of metaphor is quite common in the book.

Structure and Arrangement: The book goes back and forth in verbal exchanges between the man and the woman, but at times, there are calls from others that enter into their relationship, providing various promises, directional help with the relationship, probing questions, and so forth.

These extra voices are like chorus lines in a song or play that interject into what is being said, thus providing relief from tension that has built up, temporarily redirecting the focus, etc.

Various scholars and commentaries have assigned different divisions within the book. However, there are four noticeable breaks, each followed by sudden new beginnings. These are found in verses 2:7, 3:5, 5:1, and 8:4. As such, there are five parts, all ending “in full repose and refreshment” (Jamieson-Faucett-Brown Commentary).

Key Thought: There is repetition in the book, but the overall key thought is comprised of the thrice-repeated words –

“Do not stir up nor awaken love
Until it pleases.”

There is a time when love, if it is meant to be, will come about. To rush the process would be considered an error.

Placement and Prominence: In the Christian canon, The Song of Songs is placed as the last of the five wisdom books: Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. It is the twenty-second book in the Christian Canon.

As for the meaning of the number twenty-two, Bullinger says –

“TWENTY-TWO being the double of eleven, has the significance of that number in an intensified form,—disorganization and disintegration, especially in connection with the Word of God. For the number two is associated with the second person of the Godhead, the living Word. It is associated with the worst of Israel’s kings,—Jeroboam (1 Kings 14:20), and Ahab (1 Kings 16:29), each reigning 22 years. Eleven, we have seen, derives its significance by being an addition to Divine order (10), and a subtraction from Divine rule (12). These are two of the three ways in which the written Word of God can be corrupted—the third being alteration. “The words of the LORD are pure words”—words pertaining to this world and therefore requiring to be purified (see p. 169). But these words have been altered, taken from, and added to by man. Is there anything in this which connects it with the fact that the letters of the alphabet (Hebrew) are twenty-two in number? Does it point to the fact that the revelation of God in being committed to human language and to man’s keeping would thereby be subject to disintegration and corruption?”

One could ask a similar question about love. Because this is the twenty-second book of the Bible, does this point to the fact that something that can be perfect, such as love – because the Bible says “God is love” – may also be corruptible because of man’s fallen nature?

If so, when love is committed to humans, though being a gift of God, it is subject to disintegration and corruption. The book, then, would be a guide with underlying practical applications to assist the reader in how to successfully avoid the pitfalls of disintegration and corruption which are so obviously integrated into human love in fallen man.

As this is the twenty-second book, it is possible that links from the Old Testament to the Book of Matthew may provide a clue about the content. Each of the first twenty-eight books of the Old Testament makes one or more clear links to the 28 chapters of Matthew. The link between the Song of Songs and Matthew is –

*Song of Songs (22nd book) concerns the wedding of the king, the son of David.

Matthew 22:1, 2 –

“And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said: ‘The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son.’”

Therefore, whether Solomon was the author (or co-author) or not, he is the immediate main subject of the book, as noted in verse 1:1, even if Jesus is the ultimate subject being prefigured. Likewise, Jesus the Son of the King of the Universe, is the ultimate Subject of the Bible.

Typology, Pictures, and Foreshadowing: Because this book is placed in Scripture, it is argued that there is a greater purpose to the contents of the book than simply being a love story with moral and practical life applications.

Jews predominantly believe it is a book about the relationship of the Lord to them (meaning the nation of Israel). Christians have drawn similar conclusions, concluding that it is a book that foreshadows the relationship of the Lord Jesus to His church.

If we take a clue from Paul concerning the significance of marriage as conveyed in Scripture, it may help us to understand why the Song of Songs is so important –

“Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. 24 Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, 26 that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, 27 that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. 28 So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. 30 For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. 31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. 33 Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.” Ephesians 5:22-33

Paul identifies the ultimate purpose of marriage, which is that it reflects the relationship between Christ and the church for which He shed His blood. This idea extends to the last pages of the Bible where, in Revelation, the final consummation of the marriage of God to His people is prophetically referred to.

Because of the nature of the book, the 2nd-century Jewish sage Rabbi Akiva claimed that it was the most sacred book in the Bible, being central to Jewish life. He compared it to the Holy of Holies in the temple.

The Song of Songs, along with four other books, do hold a particularly special place in the annual life of the Jewish people, being read at key points during their annual cycle of events. These five books are known as the Five Megilloth or Five Scrolls.

The word m’gillah (the singular of megilloth) comes from galal, to roll. Thus, the word refers to the way a scroll is rolled up. Although all books of the Old Testament were written in this manner, five have been drawn out to be read at specific times in the synagogue each year during certain festivals:

  • Song of Songs: Read on the Sabbath of Passover week
  • Book of Ruth: Read on Shavuot
  • Book of Lamentations: Read on Tisha b’Av
  • Ecclesiastes: Read on the Sabbath of the week of Sukkoth
  • Book of Esther: Read on Purim

The Five Megilloth are part of the Ketuvim, the third section of the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible). Today, the books are grouped together in modern printed Hebrew Bibles, this was not always the case. In earlier times, the books were placed in chronological order among the other books of the Ketuvim.

The reason for the other four scrolls being read at particular times seems obvious. The Book of Ruth is read on Shavuoth, or Pentecost. This makes sense from the contents of the story. It is the story of redemption of a Gentile Bride, just as the predominantly Gentile-led church began at Pentecost, occurring just after Christ’s ascension.

Reading the Book of Lamentations on the Jewish people’s tragic day of Tisha b’Av reflects the pains and sufferings the people of God have experienced throughout their history, reminding them of their disobedience which has resulted in afflictions even while God devotedly maintains them as a people in accord with His covenant faithfulness.

Reading Ecclesiastes during the week of Sukkoth, Tabernacles, makes sense because it is a time of reflection in the presence of the Lord as people contemplate and discover the futility of life except when it is lived in accord with the precepts laid out by God for the conduct of His people.

And the Book of Esther being read on Purim follows logically because Purim was established based on the narrative recorded in Esther.

Seeing these parallels, and understanding that the Song of Songs is read during the Passover each year, we can and should look for a suitable explanation as to why. This will be one of the aims of the study as we progress through the book.

As noted, many try to directly equate the contents of the book with the Lord and Israel or the Lord and the church. Because of the style of writing and the rare nature of the words and phrases used, that has led to an “anything means anything” approach to the book. Rather, the Jamieson-Faucett-Brown Commentary states –

“The clue to the meaning of the Song is not to be looked for in the allegory itself, but in other parts of Scripture. ‘It lies in the casket of revelation an exquisite gem, engraved with emblematical characters, with nothing literal thereon to break the consistency of their beauty’ [Burrowes]. This accounts for the name of God not occurring in it. Whereas in the parable the writer narrates, in the allegory he never does so. The Song throughout consists of immediate addresses either of Christ to the soul, or of the soul to Christ. ‘The experimental knowledge of Christ’s loveliness and the believer’s love is the best commentary on the whole of this allegorical Song” [Leighton].’”

In other words, making direct connections to the Lord or Jesus, which is a common way of evaluating it, is not the main intent of the book and it will mar the overall interpretation. Rather, there are verbal connections to other parts of Scripture that will help the reader understand the nature of God and Christ without directly stating them or being directly equated to them. At times, however, direct connections are evident.

Unfortunately, the Jamieson-Faucet-Brown commentators then went about allegorizing the entire book to such an extent that it is hard to believe they actually read the quote in their own opening commentary.

Final Note: As for the contents of the Song of Songs, the book is comprised of 8 chapters totaling 117 verses. Its canonicity is not in question. It is found in all Hebrew manuscripts of Scripture and also in the Greek Septuagint. It is also found in other collections of the sacred writings.

With this brief summary of the book complete, we can now begin to analyze it word by word, searching out what is on the mind of the Lord with the inclusion of the book in His sacred word…

No kissing tonight, just leave me alone
I only want to watch the game, alright?
I have worked myself to death, right to the bone
And something with your hair just isn’t right

The perfume you are wearing is making me sneeze
It is just like everything about you of late
I could find someone better and do it with ease
And what is this tasteless food here on my plate?

*

Your imperfect love is failing me
But I will keep on loving you
Because of Jesus. I will wait patiently
If He can love me with all my faults, well, I can still love you

II. Ointment Poured Forth (verses 1-3)

The song of songs,

shir ha’shirim – “Song the songs.” The compound use of a Hebrew word forms its own emphasis. However, with the article affixed to the word in the genitive (Song the songs), it carries an especially strong emphasis. This is not a song out of many songs, but the song of all songs, meaning the greatest or most superlative of all songs, without any other qualifier.

The verb shir means to sing. That leads to the noun shiyr, a song. However, this does not necessarily mean a song with music, even if that is what commonly occurs when the word is used. The Song of Moses found in Deuteronomy 31 may have been read or sung to the people, either with or without instruments.

The words “Song the songs” tell us that the entirety of the song is to be considered a single song, not a collection of songs gathered over the years or from various sources as some claim. Of this song, it is next said to be…

1 (con’t) which is Solomon’s.

asher lish’lomoh – “which to Solomon.” The prefix l, the Hebrew letter lamed, signifies motion toward an object. It can mean toward, as in “I am heading toward Jerusalem.” It can signify to, as in, “I give this to you.” It can mean by, as in “This was written by David.” It can mean of, as in “This is speaking of Mary.”

People debate and argue over the meaning of the letter when affixed to almost anything. They find a similar construct elsewhere and claim it proves their point. In this case, the most likely explanation is that this is the most exceptional song of all and it has been written by Solomon or at least under his hand.

As for the name Solomon, it is generally associated with the word shalem, peace. Thus, it is defined as Peace, Peaceful, Peaceable, etc. However, Abarim insists that it is derived from shillumah, reward or recompense, (the spelling is identical) and, thus, it signifies Recompense or Fair Penalty.

As this is a book in the Bible, Solomon would then be the inspired scribe or overseer of its composition, but the Holy Spirit would be the ultimate author. David wrote numerous psalms, and many of them contained prophecies that are indisputably pointing to the Messiah. Some could only be understood after they were fulfilled in the work of Christ.

This means that the Holy Spirit guided David, using his words to anticipate the coming of Jesus and provide descriptions of His work, including His death and resurrection. If this truly is the “Song the songs,” meaning the epitome of all songs, it can be nothing other than the inspired work of God.

Both songs of Moses (Exodus 15 and Deuteronomy 32) are this type of song. Many of the psalms are this type of song. These are ultimately credited to the Lord, and the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy 31 is specifically said to be the words of the Lord written down by Moses (Deuteronomy 31:19).

As such, to claim that this is the “Song the songs,” if it was written by a man, would be a form of blasphemy, claiming it was greater than songs directly inspired by the Lord. As this is so, then when the Lord, who inspired this song, says that it is the “Song the songs,” we must treat it with the respect it deserves. Understanding this, the song begins with…

Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth—

yishaqeni min’shiqoth pihu – “Kiss me from kisses his mouth.” The word nashaq, to kiss, is used. It gives the idea of fastening up. As such, one can readily see the connection. When lips kiss, there is a fastening up that takes place.

The word is used in Ezekiel 3:13 where the wings of the living creatures in his vision “kissed” or met together. It is used in the Chronicles and Psalm 78 when referring to men being armed, kissing the implements of war. They are fastened up to them.

In this case, the song begins with a woman desiring a man to fasten up to her with the kisses of his mouth. The meaning is clearly that of an actual kiss, evidenced by the word mouth.

Some take this figuratively as if the kisses are referring to the precepts of Christ, each being like a kiss of His. However, a kiss is a kiss. Though there may be hints of such things in the book, the immediate poem is referring to a woman anticipating a kiss from a man.

The “where” of the kiss is not addressed. It could be her forehead, hand, or lips. She is simply desirous of the kiss of the kisses of his mouth. Without making a direct connection to Christ, we are seeing what God in Christ offers is to be desired. That which will fasten us to Him should be our yearning. With that, she continues…

2 (con’t) For your love is better than wine.

The word love is plural: ki tovim dodekha miyayin – “For good your loves from wine.” The change from the third to the second person is a normal occurrence in poetry. The loves of this clause are parallel to the kisses of the previous clause.

A kiss is a type of loving affection. Thus, the intent is that his kisses, his loving affections, are more desirable and better than wine.

Because of the use of the plural, the Greek translation, which is followed by some translations, say, “breasts” instead of “loves.” The words are similar in Hebrew. The standard reading, however, is correct. She is speaking in parallelism, equating his kisses to his loves (doting affections) which are better than wine.

As for yayin, or wine, it comes from an unused root meaning to effervesce. Thus it is fermented wine, an intoxicant. In Psalm 104:15, it says that “wine [yayin] makes glad the heart of man.” The doting affections, the loves, of the man are more important to her than wine, even though it makes glad the heart of man.

In other words, in a perfect loving relationship, that which is considered choice and enrapturing cannot be equated to what God in Christ can and will provide for His people. The perfect love described in the greatest of all songs is subtly being hinted at.

This is the case because, in the Bible, wine symbolizes the merging together of cultural expressions into a result. The thing that ought to happen can happen, symbolized by wine. Good things can result from cultural expressions, but God in Christ transcends cultural expressions.

As such, there is nothing on this earth, in any culture, that can match the loving affections of God through the giving of His Son. Noting that, her compliments continue…

Because of the fragrance of your good ointments,

The words are emphatic: l’reakh sh’manekha tovim – “To aroma – your oils good.” To paraphrase the meaning, one might say, “As for smell, your cologne is amazing.” It is, therefore, not just a compliment about the smell of the cologne, but of the choice of it. Everyone understands this. When we compliment the perfume or cologne of another, we are complimenting the person’s choice as well.

Aromatic oil was used in the dedication of the tabernacle and the priest. That is seen in Exodus 30 –

“Moreover the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 23 ‘Also take for yourself quality spices—five hundred shekels of liquid myrrh, half as much sweet-smelling cinnamon (two hundred and fifty shekels), two hundred and fifty shekels of sweet-smelling cane, 24 five hundred shekels of cassia, according to the shekel of the sanctuary, and a hin of olive oil. 25 And you shall make from these a holy anointing oil, an ointment compounded according to the art of the perfumer. It shall be a holy anointing oil. 26 With it you shall anoint the tabernacle of meeting and the ark of the Testimony; 27 the table and all its utensils, the lampstand and its utensils, and the altar of incense; 28 the altar of burnt offering with all its utensils, and the laver and its base. 29 You shall consecrate them, that they may be most holy; whatever touches them must be holy. 30 And you shall anoint Aaron and his sons, and consecrate them, that they may minister to Me as priests.’” Exodus 30:22-30

Every detail of the tabernacle, all of its furniture, as well as the high priest and his implements, pictures Christ Jesus. When anointed, there would have been a wonderful smell. But this oil and its contents, also pictured the Lord in every detail. That is hinted at next…

3 (con’t) Your name is ointment poured forth;

There is an alliteration that forms a play on words: shemen turaq sh’mekha – “Oil pouring – your name.” The woman said that the aroma of the object of her yet unnamed affection is good. Now, she equates the pouring of oil (shemen) that she just referred to with his name (shem).

In the Bible, a name is equated to one’s character. The name Yeshua, Jesus, for example, means Salvation. His character, meaning being the Savior, is equated to His name. He is Salvation. For example, He made a pun of His name when speaking to Zacchaeus –

“And Jesus said to him, ‘Today salvation has come to this house, because he also is a son of Abraham; 10 for the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.’” Luke 19:9, 10

Jesus was essentially saying, “I, Salvation, have come to this house.” The pouring of oil being equated to his name is realized in what pouring out oil symbolizes, meaning anointing something.

If the fragrance of the oil anticipates the Lord and His word (as was seen in Exodus), and if the oil was poured out on everything anticipating the Lord (which is also noted in Exodus), then it is a way of equating the anointing with the Person and work of the Lord –

“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You love righteousness and hate wickedness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.” Psalm 45:6, 7

This psalm is cited in Hebrews 1 and is directly equated to Jesus. And more –

“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me,
Because the Lord has anointed Me
To preach good tidings to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives,
And the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,
And the day of vengeance of our God.” Isaiah 61:1, 2

The words of Isaiah were read in the synagogue in Nazareth by Jesus in Luke 4. After reading them, it says –

“Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21 And He began to say to them, ‘Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.’” Luke 4:20, 21

Without directly identifying typology or pictures of Christ in these words, we see references to what God is doing in Scripture in subtleties found in this “Song the songs”…

*3 (fin) Therefore the virgins love you.

Rather: al ken alamoth ahevukha – “Upon thus, maidens love you.” It doesn’t say, “the virgins.” There is no article. Further, the word almah signifies a young woman. There is no reason to assume she is referring to a harem or a particular group of young women.

Rather, she is simply stating a fact – “Because of the things I just expressed, maidens love you. I am a maiden, and this is why I love you.” She is speaking of herself as an example of how any other woman would react.

The five lines of verses 2 and 3 form what is known as a pentastich, a five-lined stanza within the book. The woman is in love with this man. She is expressing herself to him in a manner that explains why she does so and why it is natural for it to be as it is.

Each thing here, if taken in a natural sense, can be corrupted. Kissing can be forced, and doting affections can be withheld or turned into something unwanted and strained. Aromatic oil, as Ecclesiastes tells us, can be ruined –

“Dead flies putrefy the perfumer’s ointment,
And cause it to give off a foul odor;
So does a little folly to one respected for wisdom and honor.” Ecclesiastes 10:1

A good name is desirable, but a name can turn bad when a person exhibits folly of some type. A good example is seen in Jeremiah –

“And it happened on the next day that Pashhur brought Jeremiah out of the stocks. Then Jeremiah said to him, ‘The Lord has not called your name Pashhur, but Magor-Missabib. For thus says the Lord: “Behold, I will make you a terror to yourself and to all your friends; and they shall fall by the sword of their enemies, and your eyes shall see it. I will give all Judah into the hand of the king of Babylon, and he shall carry them captive to Babylon and slay them with the sword. Moreover I will deliver all the wealth of this city, all its produce, and all its precious things; all the treasures of the kings of Judah I will give into the hand of their enemies, who will plunder them, seize them, and carry them to Babylon. And you, Pashhur, and all who dwell in your house, shall go into captivity. You shall go to Babylon, and there you shall die, and be buried there, you and all your friends, to whom you have prophesied lies.”’” Jeremiah 20:3-6

Such things are a problem in the world. No matter what we do and no matter who we do it with, there is always imperfection in our interactions. This is true not only with others but in our interactions with God as well. Without Jesus, there is nothing we can do about the tainted relationships that exist between us and others and between us and God.

We are finite and limited in our ability to focus or remain free from stress. We face temptations that misdirect us. We are imperfect beings in an imperfect world. The Song of Songs is titled as it is because it is a part of the Bible. As a part of the Bible, it expresses to us something that God wants us to focus on.

If love can be perfect, it can only be so because of God who is perfect. And so, He has given us a book of love and asked us to seek out the rest of His word to determine the difference between our perceptions of love and His perfect love.

He did this so that we can know that the state of perfect love that exists in Him can be realized in us and toward us if we accept it from His perspective. Why is this the “Song the songs?” Because the song of love is the epitome of the perfections of God in Christ. It is why He sent Him.

Closing Verse: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” John 3:16

Next Week: Song of Songs 1:4-6 I am smitten by you, can’t you see?… (Draw Me!) (2nd Song of Songs sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He alone is the perfect example of love – untarnished, unblemished, and completely pure and holy. He offers this love to you. So, follow Him, live for Him, and trust Him, and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

Song of Songs 1:1-3 (CG)

Song the songs which to Solomon.

2 Kiss me from kisses his mouth –
For good your loves from wine.
3 To aroma – your oils good,
Oil pouring – your name.
Upon thus, maidens love you.

Song of Songs 1:1-3 (NKJV)

The song of songs, which is Solomon’s.

Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth—
For your love is better than wine.
Because of the fragrance of your good ointments,
Your name is ointment poured forth;
Therefore the virgins love you.

 

 

Where Do Believers Go When They Die? What the Bible Says

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson.

Where Do Believers Go When They Die?
What the Bible Says

In the church, some people are evangelists, some are missionaries, some are preachers, etc. Among preachers, there are the uplifters, the charlatans, the comforters, etc. I am a preacher, and my focus is the word, especially proper doctrine from the word.

One point of doctrine that is misapplied more often than not is that of what happens to believers when they die. Because of so much faulty teaching on this subject that permeates the church, people generally have a completely misguided sense of the matter.

The Bible is not confused. Rather, when things are translated or taught incorrectly, it causes people to become confused

———————————-

Bryan Johnson is a wealthy tech entrepreneur who reportedly spends over two million dollars per year in hopes of reversing aging and avoiding death. He renounced Mormonism and lives totally for his own continued existence. People Magazine says –

“To put his body in its ‘ideal state,’ Johnson told Don’t Die filmmakers that he follows a strict daily routine that includes over a hundred different practices. Those practices include taking 54 pills throughout the day, eating a few pounds of vegetables, having dinner at 11 a.m., an hour-long workout and going to bed at 8:30 p.m. every night.”

Among other things, he also swaps blood with his son and his dad. Somehow, he thinks he is going to live forever. The Bible, however, says otherwise.

It would be ironic if he keeled over in his vegetables one day. But along with medical issues, it is impossible to control car accidents, slipping in the shower, or having his house come down on him in an earthquake. One cannot plan his way out of acts of God or the ways of man.

Bryan Johnson could use his time a lot more productively and maybe a little more freely while awaiting the inevitable, enjoying himself along the way as he goes. In the movie Grumpy Old Men, Burgess Meredith, while having a beer and talking with his son, said –

“Last Thursday, I turned 95 years old. And I never exercised a day in my life. Every morning I wake up and I smoke a cigarette, and then I eat five strips of bacon, and for lunch, I eat a bacon sandwich. And for a midday snack, bacon! A whole d*** plate. And I usually drink my dinner. Now, according to all them flat-belly experts, I should’ve took a dirt nap like 30 years ago. But each year comes and goes, and I’m still here… ha! And they keep dying.  You know, sometimes I wonder if God forgot about me.”

Though just a movie, people who live like this often live just as long as anyone else. As far as God forgetting someone though, unless the Lord comes first, we all have a meeting with Him. There is no escaping the inevitable. But there is good news for those who know the Lord…

Text Verse: “I will praise You, O Lord my God, with all my heart,
And I will glorify Your name forevermore.
13 For great is Your mercy toward me,
And You have delivered my soul from the depths of Sheol.” Psalm 86:12, 13

David spoke as if his life was threatened to the point of entering Sheol. And yet, the Lord delivered him from that. Eventually, however, David did die, and he went to that place where all people are set to go to. Is there hope for such as him?

Job knew there was and boldly proclaimed that he knew his Redeemer lived and that he would stand before Him someday. This is the hope of mankind, to be delivered to a state where death no longer can affect us. Bryan Johnson is counting on pills, vegetables, exercise, other people’s blood, and such to deliver him from death.

Others know there is a God and that He has the power to deliver even the dead from that state. But which “God,” or which expression of God that man has encountered is correct? We can know 100% and for certain by reviewing history.

One Man alone has come back from Sheol, proving several things in the process. He proved that He was without sin because the wages of sin is death. He proved that He is fully God because all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

But Jesus, the sinless Son of God, prevailed over death. And He promises those who believe in Him that He will likewise bring them back from death as well. The sermon today will explain the process of how that happens.

What happens to believers in Jesus Christ when they die? Stay tuned and you will find out. It is a process and it is described in God’s superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. Sheol, The Repository for the Dead

Despite being the most tragic event to happen to humans, death is a part of who we are and what we will experience as we watch others die and as we eventually come to our own end. The old saying, “Nothing is certain but death and taxes” fails to acknowledge the ability of people to cheat their way out of paying taxes.

However, death is a certainty that will come to pass in all of us unless the Lord comes for His people first. Kilroy J. Oldster said –

“Death is the great equalizer of human beings. Death is the boundary that we need to measure the precious texture of our lives. All people owe a death. There is no use vexing about inevitable degeneration and death because far greater people than me succumbed to death’s endless sleep without living as many years as me.”

Despite death being a constant theme in Scripture, as for what happens to people who die, when they do, the Bible doesn’t give a lot of specifics on it.

There are two types of death that are highlighted. The first is spiritual death. That is, surprisingly, a state of death we are born with. How can that be? We are born into life, not death! Rather, we are born into physical life, but we are born spiritually dead.

The first hint of this came in Genesis 2, on the 6th day of creation, and it is the first time that death is mentioned in Scripture –

“Then the Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, ‘Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.’” Genesis 2:15-17

God was not referring to physical death at this time. This is obvious from the next chapter. Adam did eat the fruit, and he didn’t die. So was the Lord was wrong, or was He was trying to intentionally scare Adam by lying to him? Rather, He was speaking of a different state of death than Adam’s physical being, a spiritual death.

That it was a spiritual death is confirmed by Paul, but what is understood is that the spiritual death leads directly to the physical death that man experiences. That is seen in Genesis 3 –

“Then to Adam He said, ‘Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, “You shall not eat of it”:
‘Cursed is the ground for your sake;
In toil you shall eat of it
All the days of your life.
18 Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you,
And you shall eat the herb of the field.
19 In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.’” Genesis 3:17-19

As for physical death, the first record of that happening is found in Genesis 4 –

“Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him.” Genesis 4:8

Concerning the state of spiritual death we are born with, Paul confirms that it is so in Romans 5 –

“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.” Romans 5:12-14

First and foremost, Paul is speaking of spiritual death here. This is certain because he notes that sin entered the world through Adam and death spread to all men. If death spread to all men through Adam, who was alive physically but spiritually dead through sin, then he must be referring to spiritual death.

He also says that sin is not imputed where there is no law. Other than the law given to Adam, no other law is recorded in Scripture before the birth of Cain and Abel. And yet, Paul says that death spread to all men.

If sin comes through law and there was no other law by which sin is imputed, then it means that Paul is referring to spiritual death that is transmitted from father to child. Our physical deaths are merely a result of our spiritually dead state.

As for physical death, there is a lot said about it in Scripture. Chapter 5 of Genesis lists the generations of Adam, with the exception of Enoch, who was taken by God, and Noah, who ends the chapter, it notes that Adam and each of his descendants died. So from Genesis 2 through Genesis 5, it is like reading a smorgasbord about death.

All of that death, however, would be eclipsed by the events of Genesis 6 & 7 where God destroyed the entire world by flood with the exception of Noah, his family, and the animals on the ark. Genesis 8 is the first chapter since Genesis 2 where nothing about a person’s death is specifically mentioned. Instead, the Lord promised that He would never again destroy every living thing as He had done.

But death still reigned. At the end of Genesis 9, Noah is said to have died. Genesis 11 provides the genealogical list of Noah’s son Shem with the years they lived. At the end of Genesis 11, Terah, Abraham’s Father is said to have died.

This seemingly endless succession of death continued all the way through the Old Testament. With the exception of Enoch and later Elijah, every person who lived also died.

Different explanations about death are spattered throughout Genesis. Terms such as being buried, dying in a “good old age,” or being gathered to one’s people, are given to explain death, but the place where they go is only first mentioned in Genesis 37 where Jacob says –

“And all his sons and all his daughters arose to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted, and he said, ‘For I shall go down into the grave to my son in mourning.’ Thus his father wept for him.” Genesis 37:35

The word translated there as grave is sh’ol, a noun coming from sha’al, to ask. Thus, it means Asked For. It is understood from the rest of the Old Testament that this is the place where all the dead go. However, what happens there is not described in any detail.

Outside of some poetic and prophetic proclamations, the only real hint that can be derived from being in Sheol is found in 1 Samuel 28. King Saul was out of options concerning what lay in store for a battle coming the next day. The Lord did not respond to his requests for guidance, and so he went to the witch at En Dor to consult the dead. There it says –

“Then the woman said, ‘Whom shall I bring up for you?’
And he said, ‘Bring up Samuel for me.’
12 When the woman saw Samuel, she cried out with a loud voice. And the woman spoke to Saul, saying, ‘Why have you deceived me? For you are Saul!’
13 And the king said to her, ‘Do not be afraid. What did you see?’
And the woman said to Saul, ‘I saw a spirit ascending out of the earth.’
14 So he said to her, ‘What is his form?’
And she said, ‘An old man is coming up, and he is covered with a mantle.’ And Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and he stooped with his face to the ground and bowed down.
15 Now Samuel said to Saul, ‘Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up?’” 1 Samuel 28:11-15

As noted, other than some poetic and prophetic literature that explains things about Sheol, this is the only instance where such a thing occurs. All we can glean from it is that Saul had disturbed Samuel by being called up from Sheol. It was as if he was peacefully sleeping, and Saul’s arousing him was unwelcome.

When Adam fell, death spread to all men
And so all in Adam die
When our numbered days are finished, it is over… and then
Where do we go? Up to the sky?

We who have trusted in the Lord Jesus Christ
Are set to die unless the rapture happens first
But with His shed blood, our souls were priced
And so, death in us will surely be reversed

God promises that it is so
We have no need to doubt that it is true
Because of Jesus, we can fully know
That to us eternal life God will endue

II. Where Believers Go When They Die

If you ask people where they will go when they die, you’ll get a lot of different answers. A rather common one, however, is “I don’t know.” Many people give no thought about it despite the fact that death is the anticipated end for all people.

As for nonbelievers, nothing has changed. When they die, they go to the same place as man has gone to since the beginning. It isn’t like God whipped up something new for the dead just because man has gone from Old Testament times to New.

This is made clear in Scripture and it is not really debated by scholars. However, if you ask believers where they will go when they die, the almost universal answer is, “To heaven.” They don’t qualify it like, “My ultimate end is in heaven.” And so even if they know that is the case, they simply say, “To heaven.”

But the ultimate place for believers isn’t the question being addressed in this sermon. The question is, “Where do believers go when they die,” meaning the right away part. If you were to ask it that way, it is still pretty certain the answer is, “I’m going to heaven.”

It is as if they will die one minute and be in heaven the next. Is this what happens? The answer is found in Scripture, but it takes a bit of work, a proper understanding of certain doctrines, and laying emotions, biases, and presuppositions aside.

As a spoiler alert, I will give the answer and then defend it. This may prematurely weed out the people who refuse to lay aside their emotions, biases, and presuppositions. But their failure to finish the contents of the sermon will only hinder their understanding of Scripture.

The answer is that believers who die do not go directly to heaven. Being believers, that is their final destination, but it is not the first stop on the trip. Paul states this explicitly in his writings, but it is particularly clear in 1 Corinthians 15. There are verses that seem to contradict this, but they will be dealt with as we go.

Where believers go when they die now is the same place where people went in the Old Testament and where nonbelievers since the time of Christ also go, Sheol. The corresponding word in Greek is Hades.

We can know with all certainty that Sheol and Hades are the same because of what it says in Acts 2, where Peter cites Psalm 16, a messianic psalm about the death of Jesus –

For You will not leave my soul in Hades [Sheol as recorded in the psalm],
Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.
28 You have made known to me the ways of life;
You will make me full of joy in Your presence.’
29 “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. Acts 2:27-31

Jesus went to Hades. He resurrected from Hades. But that leaves an obvious question to be considered and answered, “What about what He said to the thief on the cross?”

“But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, ‘Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.’ 42 Then he said to Jesus, ‘Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.’
43 And Jesus said to him, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.’” Luke 23:40-43

See! See! This proves that people go to heaven. Actually, no. It doesn’t. Peter said that Jesus, citing the 16th Psalm and referring to the words of Jesus in death, was in Hades (Sheol). Therefore, what people think about Paradise being heaven is flawed.

The word paradeisos, translated as Paradise, is found only three times in the New Testament. It is also found nineteen times in the Greek Old Testament (Genesis 2:8, 2:9, 2:10, 2:15, 2:16, 3:1, 3:2, 3:3, 3:8 (twice), 3:9, 3:23, 3:24, 13:10; Joel 2:3; Ezekiel 28:13, 31:8 (twice), 31:9). None of these refer to heaven.

This is because it doesn’t mean heaven. It is a Persian word signifying an enclosure or park. Thus, it can mean a place in heaven, like in Revelation 2:7, or it can mean a place in Hades, like in Luke 23. It can also be a place on earth that is idyllic in nature. We think of paradise as somewhere else, but it can be right here. We used to have a paradise right out on Siesta Key. Since Helene and Milton… not so much.

Jesus went to Sheol/Hades. When there, He was in a paradise. He gives an example of this in the parable of Lazarus. In Hades, there were two separate and distinct realms. The one at Abraham’s side would be a state of paradise. The other… not so much. And more, this doesn’t mean that there are only two places in Hades. It simply means that there are at least two places in Hades.

Heaven is a different word, ouranos. But even it – in both Testaments – has various meanings. It can refer to the sky, the starry heavens, the spiritual heavens, and so forth.

The word is derived from oros, a mountain or hill. Thus, it speaks of elevation. The context of the word ouranos in each usage is needed to determine what is being referred to.

The next obvious question to arise from some is, “Wha.. wha… What about Paul’s words in 2 Corinthians 5:6-8. They ‘prove’ that all believers go straight to heaven!” Actually, no. They don’t. The NKJV, like most translations, renders these verses in a rather flawed manner, but we will go with it for now –

“So we are always confident, knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord. For we walk by faith, not by sight. We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.”

With merely a surface read, people immediately jump to the conclusion that one thing leads directly to the next and that all believers are taken lickety-split to heaven. It is even a common misquote: “Absent from the body; present with the Lord,” forgetting that the word “and” rests between the clauses.

However, suppose someone were to argue that the words mean both being absent from the body and being present with the Lord. The Bible doesn’t say this, but from an academic point, we could argue for that. To answer, we can start with a question: Are we as believers with the Lord now?

The answer depends on what “with the Lord” means, but for the believer, the answer should be obvious. We are in Christ. There is physical absence (or presence) with the Lord (or with others), and there is spiritual absence (or presence).

Obviously, these things depend on whether a person is saved or not. But to see a practical example of this, in 1 Corinthians 5, Paul uses the same terminology toward those in Corinth.

He notes his physical presence, and he notes his spiritual presence. Likewise, any believer who is in Christ is… in Christ. He is present with the Lord. That is a truth that permeates Paul’s writings. There is no time we are not present with the Lord.

Referring to 1 Corinthians 5, Paul writes concerning this dual nature of presence concerning himself –

“For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” 1 Corinthians 5:3-5

But more pertinent to Paul’s words about being present with the Lord, are his words in their full context from 2 Corinthians 5 because, as we are aware, context matters.

Again, these words are from the NKJV. It follows the KJV and it is not well rendered, but we will go with it for now with explanations as we progress –

“For we know that if our earthly house, this tent, is destroyed [meaning death], we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens [something that occurs at the resurrection as indicated in 1 Corinthians 15]. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven [our permanent, glorified body that comes at the resurrection], if indeed, having been clothed [meaning in a body], we shall not be found naked [a soul without a body, meaning Hades]. For we who are in this tent groan, being burdened [living in our current state], not because we want to be unclothed [dying – the soul without the body], but further clothed [death is a state of being unclothed, an unnatural state that occurs until we receive our heavenly body, our “further clothed”], that mortality may be swallowed up by life. Now He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.

So we are always confident, knowing that while we are at home in the body [our current clothing] we are absent [physically absent] from the Lord [because we are in a state of corruption]. For we walk by faith, not by sight. We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body [our state of corruption] and to be present with the Lord [a state of incorruption, but Paul does not say that this is immediate, as if all suddenly go to heaven. He is simply making a point that we cannot be present with the Lord while in this corruptible body].

Therefore we make it our aim, whether present [he uses the same word here as in verse 6 and indicating being at home in the body] or [better ‘whether’ the same word just used in this verse – “whether present”] absent [he uses the same word as in verse 6 and indicating to be absent from the Lord], to be well pleasing to Him [Paul could not say this if we immediately went to heaven because we would be with a body in a state of incorruption if we were with Jesus in heaven]. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ [all believers, both alive and asleep, gathered at the resurrection for their coming judgment], that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. 11 Knowing, therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are well known to God, and I also trust are well known in your consciences.”

If we are naked at death but supposedly go to heaven, then we would be bodyless souls in heaven, something the Bible never teaches. But more, one of the problems with understanding this passage properly is the faulty nature of most translations. They obscure what Paul is saying by mistranslating the participles. For example, a literal translation of verses 6-9 says –

“Therefore, encouraging always, and having known that dwelling in the body we emigrating from Lord. 7 For through faith we roam [peripateó: tread around], not by sight. 8 And we are confident, and we approve more, emigrated from the body, and dwell with the Lord. 9 And therefore, we affectionate – if dwelling, if emigrating – acceptable to Him to be (CG).

Paul’s words in verse 9 about being absent are based on what he said in verse 6, not verse 8. It is the same word in both as well as verse 8, but the use of the present participle in verse 6 and again in verse 9 shows us this with certainty.

And, as noted above, Paul could not say this if we immediately went to heaven (emigrated) because we would be in a body in a state of incorruption if we were with Jesus in heaven. As such, we would be pleasing. It wouldn’t be our desire (affectionating) but our reality.

The only time we can desire (affectionate) to please the Lord is when we are alive. When we die (emigrate), regardless where we actually go, our eternal state is sealed. Notice the chiastic structure that is found throughout Paul’s writings, and which is also seen here –

Again, and further, Paul does not equate being absent from the body to being present with the Lord. He says that being absent from the body, meaning our current state of corruption, is less desirable than to be present with the Lord. That is why he spoke in verse 4 about groaning and being burdened.

It is also why he goes on to speak of the judgment seat of Christ in verses 10 & 11. The two thoughts complement each other. It is as if he is shouting out, “Anything but being here bearing this burden of life! When I mess up, judgment for my faults lies ahead.”

Unfortunately, bad translations often equate to bad theology. In this instance, Paul’s use of the word kai, and, signifies two things, not one. It is approved more to be absent from the body, and it is approved more to be present with the Lord. This doesn’t mean they occur together. That was seen in the analysis above, and it will be explained further as we continue.

The point that Paul is making is that even when we die, we are in Christ. Paul addresses this in several ways in at least two letters. It is the main point of his words in 1 Thessalonians 4 –

“But I do not want you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who have fallen  asleep, lest you sorrow as others who have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus.

15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.” 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18

It is understood from Paul’s words that the people of Thessalonica were under the impression that those who had died might not be a part of what the Lord promised. But he tells them otherwise.

In these words, as in 1 Corinthians 15, which will be evaluated momentarily, Paul exactingly explains that there are two categories of people in regard to what he is referring to: they are asleep (meaning dead and in Sheol/Hades) or they are still alive.

That’s it. Those are the only two options Paul speaks of. The logic of Paul’s words from earlier is, “Better to be asleep in Hades than to be here in this sin-sack.”

But wait. Let’s stop and address an issue that always comes up concerning such an analysis about death. There is the inane accusation floating around that teaching soul sleep is heresy.

First, Paul says that the dead in Christ are… anyone? Yes, asleep. In fact, he says it many times. Jesus said the same thing about Lazarus in John 11, and Luke recorded it concerning both David of Old Testament times and Stephen, the first martyr recorded in New Testament times.

The implication is that nothing has changed between the dispensations. The same content state that Samuel felt before he was disturbed by Saul is what each departed believer to this day experiences.

Second, he notes (as indicated above) that the soul without a body is the state of a person when he dies. If the soul without a body is his state, and if the state of the person is asleep, then the person’s soul is… asleep. One plus one always equals two in proper theology.

This doesn’t mean the person is not aware. The interaction between Samuel and Saul shows us this. He was aware and he was resting comfortably, something that can be inferred from his words. He was in Sheol, the same place where believers today go, meaning Hades (as explained already).

Third, whoever started the “teaching soul sleep is a heresy” doesn’t know what a heresy is. If it is incorrect, it would simply be bad doctrine, not a heresy. Further, such a person doesn’t know the Bible very well. Saying that is merely a tactic to scare people into a false belief about going to heaven as soon as you die, which the Bible doesn’t teach.

Fourth, to claim that those who died have been resurrected to heaven means that the resurrection… has happened. If that were true, there wouldn’t be any believers left to talk about it. It is exactly what Paul calls “straying from the truth” in his letter to Timothy –

“And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, 18 who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some. 19 Nevertheless the solid foundation of God stands, having this seal: ‘The Lord knows those who are His,’ and, ‘Let everyone who names the name of Christ depart from iniquity.’” 2 Timothy 2:17-19

In all instances where the resurrection is spoken of, it is either explicit or implied that this involves both the living and the dead in the church.

That is seen, for example, in Paul’s next words in 1 Corinthians 15. They are perfectly in line with what we have seen so far, meaning that there are only two categories of people at this time, they are 1) asleep (meaning dead and in Sheol/Hades), or 2) still alive. He says –

“But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep [meaning those who have died in the church since Christ’s completed work]. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die [Greek: present tense], even so in Christ all shall be made alive [Greek: future tense]. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.” 1 Corinthians 15:20-23

People who are dead in Christ “have fallen asleep.” That will remain unchanged until “His coming.” Has Christ come yet? Again, one plus one will always equal two in proper theology. Further explaining this, he says –

“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed [Greek: future tense]— 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.” 1 Corinthians 15:50-52

Paul continues to explain that those who have died are… are… anyone? Yes! Asleep! They will remain in that state until the time of the rapture, not before. He further confirms this as he continues, saying…

“So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: ‘Death is swallowed up in victory.’
55 ‘O Death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?’” 1 Corinthians 15:54, 55

Paul could not say this if the people who died were not still in Hades. It would be a perfectly pointless pronouncement. If people who died were immediately taken to heaven, then the victory over Hades would have come before our state of incorruption, meaning while we are still corrupt.

But he just tied our state of becoming incorrupt to the event we call the rapture. Again –

“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed— 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.” 1 Corinthians 15:50-52

The meaning of Paul’s words is that all Christians, both alive and dead, are currently in a state of corruption. None have been made incorrupt yet. We still bear the effects of sin even though we are in Christ.

Until the rapture, which includes both the living and the dead in Christ, that will not change. Until then, Paul says, clearly and without any ambiguity, that in our corruption, when we die, we go to Hades, where Christ was. When the rapture occurs, our corruption will be replaced with incorruption. Hades will no longer have dominion over the dead.

While we are in Hades, we will (I’m speaking to believers here) be in Paradise – a really nice place to nap, be it two thousand years or 2 seconds.

The incorrectly translated words “to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord,” in 2 Corinthians 5 do not mean we go to heaven when we die. If they did, we would have a glaring and insurmountable contradiction in Paul’s letters.

We are the Lord’s. He has full control over us. This is a truth that exists even right now. We are present with the Lord. When we die, that state does not change. This is why Paul said, “Therefore comfort one another with these words” (1 Thessalonians 4:18).

The Thessalonians, and indeed all believers who don’t understand these key points of doctrine, may feel that when the rapture occurs, those who had died are lost. Such is not the case.

Paul could not have even written the words of 1 Thessalonians 4 unless this was the issue at hand and which continues to be a misinterpreted issue to this day.

To review:

1) Paradise, as noted by Jesus in Luke 23, is not heaven. Jesus confirmed this when He said in John 20:17 that He had not ascended to the Father. That was after the resurrection. Paradise cannot be heaven. If Paradise was heaven, then there would be a contradiction in Jesus’ words.

2) Until we are glorified, we cannot enter heaven. Paul says we are corruptible and cannot inherit that which is incorruptible.

Here is the sequence –

“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed— 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality54 So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.” 1 Corinthians 15:50-54

Only then…

55 “O Death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?” 1 Corinthians 15:55

3) The rapture deals with both the dead and the living as noted in 1 Thessalonians 4.

4) 2 Corinthians 5:6 does not mean that when we die, we will be physically present with the Lord in heaven. Despite misanalyses, usually based on faulty translations, that verse does not mean that there is an immediate transfer at death from this realm to heaven. That only occurs for living believers at the rapture.

———————————-

Scripture reveals to us that those who have died have not gone to heaven. However, we are assured in 1 Thessalonians 4 that they are safely in the hands of the Lord. However, they are not yet – according to the clear and unambiguous timeline in 1 Corinthians 15 – glorified and in heaven.

That day lies ahead for them and for us. But God set it forth in this manner for His purposes. At some point, known to God alone, He will call forth His people from the grave and bring them, along with all of His living believers, to Himself.

The words are recorded, the event will come to pass, and we should not in any way worry that it might not happen just as He says. We are to be people of faith, living in faith until that day. This includes faith that God has securely kept those who have gone before us through the sad event of death and that they will be raised when we are translated.

God has assured us that it is so. Let us have faith in His promises. May it be so, to the glory of God who created us and redeemed us according to His tender mercies.

Closing Verse: “…that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, 11 if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.” Philippians 3:10, 11

A Few Additional Passages: After giving this sermon, two questions were asked concerning other verses that may point to a different conclusion. The first being–

“Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, 52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.” -Matthew 27:51-53

There is nothing beyond these verses to explain who these people were, how long they were dead, or what happened to them afterwards. Therefore, there really is nothing else to add to them but speculation. However, it doesn’t say they went to heaven. It says they were raised, went into the holy city, and appeared to many.

As there is Lazarus as a precedent from John 11, the most likely explanation is that these were people who had believed Jesus was the Messiah and who had died recently. As it says that they went into the holy city, they could have come from all over Israel.

It is estimated that there were 500,000 to 600,000 people in Israel at Jesus’ time. If the death rate was 4500 people per year, then 375 per month would die. If 5 percent of them believed Jesus was the Messiah and He raised them to substantiate this, that would be about 18 people. If 18 people were raised and came to Jerusalem, proving they had returned to life, like Lazarus did, it would be sufficient evidence to justify that Jesus truly was the Messiah.

After this, they could have lived out normal lives, like Lazarus, and died at whatever age the Lord determined.

The second set of verses which seem to point to going straight to heaven are from Psalm 68:18, and which is substantially repeated in Ephesians 4:8–

Therefore He says:
“When He ascended on high,
He led captivity captive,
And gave gifts to men.”

The verse begins with “Therefore.” This is stated to explain the previous words, “But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift.” In order to show this, Paul cites the substance of Psalm 68:18. He changes several words, and he goes from the 2nd person to the 3rd person. Thus, it is not a direct quote, but rather it conveys the substance of what was said and then he equates it to the triumph of the work of Christ –

“You have ascended on high,
You have led captivity captive;
You have received gifts among men,
Even from the rebellious,
That the Lord God might dwell there.” Psalm 68:18

In the Old Testament, the Ark of the Covenant was the place where God met with man. Its placement in Zion was the sign of victory of God over His enemies. They were defeated, the land had been subdued, and God rested in His place. The thought of ascending on high is that of being exalted above all the others who have been placed in subjection to Him.

Though Zion was not the highest peak in elevation, it was considered the highest place of honor. Thus, any time that someone traveled to Jerusalem, regardless of direction or elevation from which they came, they were said to “go up” to Jerusalem.

As the Lord who dwelt between the cherubim of the ark had been brought to this place of exaltation, and as it was a sign that His enemies had been vanquished, it says, “You have led captivity captive.” This signifies that those who were once the captors (called the abstract “captivity”) had themselves been made captive. They were now the subdued prisoners who were conducted in bonds during the triumphal procession to that spot of exultation.

Quite often this verse is cited as a display of the prisoners being released from captivity by the work of Christ. Though this is something He did, it is not what is being referred to here. Rather, it is the foes of God being brought into captivity. After this defeating of His enemies, it then says, “You have received gifts among men.”

Ascribing this thought to the work of Christ, Paul modifies it and says, “And gave gifts to men.” This is the specific explanation of the previous verse which said, “…but to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift.” The spoils of war were handed out to the subjects of the kingdom according to the pleasure of the vanquishing ruler. Likewise, God passes out His gifts of victory according to His choosing as well.

Paul’s words, though modifying the psalm, do not change the intent. The two thoughts side by side say:

  • And gave gifts to men (Paul)
  • You have received gifts among men (Psalm)

The same idea is expressed. Christ received gifts which He then immediately turned around and handed out to His subjects. This follows from other times in Scripture where the same thought is denoted by a sudden and succinct expression. Scripture may say something like, “Bring me a heifer,” which is simply a shortened form of “Bring a heifer to me for sacrifice.”

The analogy Paul is making is that Christ was victorious in His work. He was exalted to the highest position, there at the right hand of God, and from that position He gives the Holy Spirit to His subjects in the measure He so chooses. These two verses refer to just the opposite of what most people think.

This idea actually goes back to Deuteronomy 21:10. That was explained when I went through the Deuteronomy sermons –

10 (con’t) and you take them captive,

Again, it is third person, masculine, singular: v’shavita shivyo – “and you take captive his captivity.” It is a poetic way of saying that the entity which had its own victories and held its own captives has now become captive. David, probably thinking of this verse right now, penned this in Psalm 68 –

“You have ascended on high,
You have led captivity captive;
You have received gifts among men,
Even from the rebellious,
That the Lord God might dwell there.” Psalm 68:18

Paul then cites this verse from the psalms in Ephesians 4 –

“Therefore He says:
‘When He ascended on high,
He led captivity captive,
And gave gifts to men’” Ephesians 4:8

Those who were once the captors (called the abstract “captivity”) had themselves been made captive. They were now the subdued prisoners who were conducted in bonds during the triumphal procession to the victor’s spot of exultation.

Quite often the words in Ephesians are incorrectly cited as a display of the prisoners being released from captivity by the work of Christ. Though this is something He did, it is not what is being referred to there. Rather, as can be seen from Moses’ words of Deuteronomy, it is the foes of God being brought into captivity.

 

Malachi 4:1-6 (The Day is Coming)

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson.

Malachi 4:1-6
The Day is Coming

(Typed 28 October 2024) The book of Malachi and the Old Testament canon are complete with these verses in Malachi. Right at the very beginning, God set forth a plan that has been slowly and methodically worked out in the course of human history.

Much of it is centered on Israel. We might ask, “Why Israel?” But the same question would be asked if He had chosen the Mongolians or the Peruvians. He chose Israel, and that is how it is. He knew what would work and why.

He knew what languages would convey His intentions for His word. He knew what family, genealogy, nation, and location would bring about His purposes in the ways He determined.

His word shows that He purposefully intervened at various times in order to ensure things continued on as they should. Everything about the word shows careful attention to every detail.

One example from Israel’s history, which is alluded to in today’s verses, is cited by Jesus –

Text Verse: “‘Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.’
57 Then the Jews said to Him, ‘You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?’
58 Jesus said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.’” John 8:56-58

Abraham rejoiced at the good news of God in Christ. The only way that was possible was for God to reveal it to him in some way. Paul explains that in the book of Galatians. But the Jews who argued with Jesus should have clued into what He was saying because they were told to remember the Law of Moses.

The story of Abraham is a part of the Law of Moses. If they had been less arrogant and more willing to study and accept God’s word, they would not have rejected Jesus’ words. They would have understood, believed, and been saved.

And the same is true with us today. Our understanding of God, what He is doing, and how it affects us is found in only one place, His word. It may be explained in ten thousand commentaries and sermons, but it is only found in the Bible.

Unless we actually read the word and check what we are taught, we can have no idea if what we have learned is correct or not. The leaders of Israel instructed the people in all sorts of things, but they often had little to do with the word.

Those instructing were the ones Jesus most vehemently argued against. Do you suppose the same would be true today? If He showed up right now, how would He evaluate the leaders of churches? He would do so in accordance with His word.

Let us remember this, both as a congregation and individually. We must be careful how we conduct our affairs in relation to it. The process of salvation is explained in the word. Many churches get that right, but their doctrine beyond that may be highly questionable.

People being saved doesn’t equate to receiving rewards for how their lives were lived in their state of salvation. And for those who fail to come to Jesus, only bad times can be expected. These are certain truths that are to be found in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. Root and Branch (verses 1-3)

“For behold, the day is coming,

ki hineh hayom ba – “For behold! The day coming.”

The day referred to here corresponds to what was said in Malachi 3:2 –

“But who can endure the day of His coming?
And who can stand when He appears?”

But what exactly is this day? Scholars vary in their interpretation of its meaning. Some place it at the time of Christ’s coming and the nation’s rejection of Him. Thus, the destruction of Jerusalem by fire and the exile of the people. Others see it as the day when Christ returns in fiery judgment, as in 2 Peter 3:7 –

“But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”

If this is the same day referred to in Malachi 3, one might assume the day is in Jesus’ first coming. Malachi 3:1 begins with the thought of the Lord sending His messenger before Jesus. All three of the synoptic gospels cite Jesus saying this was John the Baptist –

“As they departed, Jesus began to say to the multitudes concerning John: ‘What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? But what did you go out to see? A man clothed in soft garments? Indeed, those who wear soft clothing are in kings’ houses. But what did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I say to you, and more than a prophet. 10 For this is he of whom it is written:
“Behold, I send My messenger before Your face,
Who will prepare Your way before You.”’” Matthew 11:7-10

However, verse 5 will say that this day is when the Lord will send Elijah the prophet, a man who did not die but who was taken directly to heaven in a whirlwind, as recorded in 2 Kings 2.

To further complicate the matter, Jesus directly equated John the Baptist to Elijah in His continued words of Matthew 11 –

“Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. 12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force. 13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. 14 And if you are willing to receive it, he is Elijah who is to come. 15 He who has ears to hear, let him hear!” Matthew 11:11-15

The answer to the meaning of “the day” comes from understanding God’s irrevocable faithfulness to His unfaithful people, Israel. He has promised that He will bring them into the New Covenant. As a nation, that has not yet happened.

And so, the day is not one particular time, nor is it one particular event. It is a succession of events that comprise the day of the Lord’s judgment spanning the history of Israel from Christ’s first advent until His second.

John the Baptist came as the promised Elijah and the nation did not receive Jesus. In the future, Elijah himself will return to testify once again to the nation. This will be seen as we continue. This succession of events that comprise “the day” will be…

1 (con’t) Burning like an oven,

boer katanur – “Burning according to the firepot.” In Malachi 3:2, it said, “For He according to fire – smelting.” Christ was compared to the fire. Now, the day of Christ is compared to the firepot in which the smelting occurs.

Fire in the open burns with great heat, but the firepot is used to increase the heat. In such heat, everything impure is burned away or separated, such as the slag separating from the pure metal. Nobody can doubt that this type of process was used to purge Israel after Christ’s ascension.

In fact, preterists cling to the fact that the judgment upon Israel occurred at that time in the destruction of the temple and the exile of the people. To them, that was the end of Israel in the redemption narrative. And yet, this causes a dilemma because Israel exists today not only as a people but in the land promised to the people.

Preterists and replacement theologians dismiss this fact as an aberration, clinging to the notion that the church is the only focus of what God is doing in the world today. There has to be a lot of spiritualizing of Scripture in order to hold to this view.

But if taken literally, then the words of Malachi – and indeed both testaments of Scripture – tell us that “the day” is not isolated to a single time of the past nor of a day future to us now. The judgment of God upon Israel is an ongoing succession of events. It is a day of judgment…

1 (con’t) And all the proud, yes, all who do wickedly will be stubble.
And the day which is coming shall burn them up,”
Says the Lord of hosts,
“That will leave them neither root nor branch.

v’hayu khal zedim v’khal oseh rishah qash v’lihat otham hayom haba amar Y’hovah ts’vaoth asher lo yaazov lahem shoresh v’anaph

“‘And became all the arrogant,
And all doing wickedness – stubble!
And licks them, the day, the coming,’
Said Yehovah Sabaoth,
‘Which naught relinquishes to them root and branch.’”

The arrogant and those doing wickedness correspond to those of the previous chapter –

“And now, we straightened arrogant,
Also built doing wickedness,
Also tested God and escape.” Malachi 3:15

Those who think they are ok, ignoring the Lord and trusting in themselves apart from Him, are nothing but stubble. They will be completely burnt up through His fiery judgment.

The word lahat is used. It comes from a primitive root signifying to lick. That, however, is interpreted as to blaze, burn, set on fire, and so forth. The idea is identical to our concept of flames licking up what they come in contact with.

This coming day will be like a flaming tongue that will lick up the arrogant in the firepot, consuming them. As for the words of the verse itself, they are like what John the Baptist said to the people –

“But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, ‘Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance, and do not think to say to yourselves, “We have Abraham as our father.” For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones. 10 And even now the ax is laid to the root of the trees. Therefore every tree which does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.’” Matthew 3:7-12

John equates the time of this wrath to the time of Christ’s appearing. And yet, Jews formed the initial body of the church under the New Covenant. They continue to be saved today. Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 2 –

 “For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God which are in Judea in Christ Jesus. For you also suffered the same things from your own countrymen, just as they did from the Judeans, 15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they do not please God and are contrary to all men, 16 forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they may be saved, so as always to fill up the measure of their sins; but wrath has come upon them to the uttermost.” 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16

Consider what is happening. Both Jews and Gentiles have entered the New Covenant. And yet, there are Jews who have not entered it. The Gentiles were never under the law, so those Jews who do not enter the New Covenant are the only ones who remain under the law.

The Law of Moses did not end for them when Christ came and initiated the New Covenant. It only ends for them if and when they enter into the New Covenant. Hebrews 8:13 makes this explicit –

“In that He says, ‘A new covenant,’ He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”

The law is obsolete. It is no longer what God is doing in the process of redemptive history. However, it is not yet gone. It remains binding upon Israel until they come into the New Covenant.

As for the saying, “Which naught relinquishes to them root and branch,” the general consensus passed on from scholar to scholar is that this is a proverbial saying expressing utter destruction and signifying that none shall escape. Although this is true for those being described, this is not the intent.

Rather, the meaning is to be derived from the purpose of roots and branches. A root provides stability, brings in moisture, transfers nutrients into the tree to feed it, and so forth.

The branches produce leaves that receive the sunlight, take in carbon dioxide, and convert it, along with water, into glucose and oxygen. Thus, they produce the necessary nutrients for the tree to grow. It doesn’t say there will be no root or branch, but that the fire, the judgment, will not relinquish to them root or branch.

Paul uses this metaphor and equates it to Israel in the process of God’s judgment, thus defining “the day” as an ongoing succession of events –

“For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, so are the branches. 17 And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, 18 do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you.” Romans 11:16-18

Paul’s words are misinterpreted in many directions. The meaning is that branches are equated to what God is doing in the process of redemption. There are believing Jews and also believing Gentiles. The believing Jews are never broken off from God’s purposes. The believing Gentiles are grafted into God’s purposes. They receive what the roots provide and then produce what is needed for the tree.

The unbelieving Jews are broken off. They receive nothing, and they have no part in what God is doing in the New Covenant. Unbelieving Gentiles are never grafted into the tree.

Paul further explains this process, but this is the intent of the Lord’s words through Malachi. The focus is solely on Israel. The mystery of the inclusion of Gentiles is a part of God’s plans, but at the time of Malachi, it was a mystery not yet revealed. Thus, for the sake of the next words, the focus remains on Israel alone…

But to you who fear My name
The Sun of Righteousness shall arise
With healing in His wings;

Rather: v’zar’khah lakhem yire sh’mi shemesh ts’daqah umarphe bikhnapheha

“And arose to you – ‘fearful My name,’
Sun Righteousness,
And a healing in her extremities.”

The word bikhnapheha refers to a feminine entity as in her (or its), but certainly not his (His). The word sun is a common noun. The word righteousness is a feminine noun. Malachi is focusing on the righteousness aspect of the sun, not the sun itself. The righteousness defines the sun. More exactly, righteousness itself is equated to a sun.

To understand this, think of the song “Peace Train” by Cat Stevens. Peace is equated by him to a train that ran throughout the land. What is referred to here is a Righteousness Sun rising over the people who fear the name of the Lord.

This is not to diminish the role of Christ, but there is no personal reference to Him. Rather, the words are given to define what He did. This can be seen in the first use of the word righteousness in the New Testament –

“Then Jesus, He comes from the Galilee upon the Jordan unto John to be immersed by him. 14 And John, he thoroughly hinders Him, saying, ‘I, I have need by You to be immersed, and You, You come unto me?’ 15 And Jesus, having answered, said unto him, ‘Permit now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.’ Then he permits Him.” Matthew 3:13-15 (CGT)

Christ’s coming is equated to a Righteousness Sun that shone over Israel. The people could not meet the demands of the law, but He could and did. His work fulfilled all righteousness (the extremities of the Righteousness Sun) for the people, thus healing them from the infection of sin that separated them from God.

The law, except as fulfilled by Him, stood opposed to them. They were expected to see this and come to Him for healing. This thought takes the reader all the way back to the introduction of sin in Genesis 3. The issue is dealt with, finally, in and through the work of Christ. For those who would trust in Him…

2 (con’t) And you shall go out
And grow fat like stall-fed calves.

vitsathem uphish’tem k’egle marbeq – “And gone out and spread according to calves a stall.” The words are not limited to either the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 or to the tribulation as various scholars claim. Rather, at any time a person is eclipsed by the Righteousness Sun, he is healed. In this healing, such a person is freed as a calf from the stall.

The word used here is phush, a word coming from a primitive root signifying to spread. It is debated what the intent is. Some equate it to growing fat. But if the calves go out, they’re not stall-fed afterward. Such an analysis seems to jumble concepts.

Others equate it to the act of the calves, springing about as they spread out in the fields. That would be more of a paraphrase based on observation of how cows might act when released.

What seems most likely is that when calves are stalled, they are close together. Thus, everything under their feet would be crushed. As such, “according to calves a stall” is saying that when calves go out, what they do would be as explained in the next words…

You shall trample the wicked,

v’asothem r’shaim – “And splootched wicked.” So, yes, I made that word up. The Hebrew word is asas, and it is found only here. It comes from a primitive root signifying to squeeze out juice. That brings to mind the sound or effect made when you grab something and squeeze out its juice – splootch.

There are other words that mean trample, tread, crush, etc. If one steps on a grape or squeezes a lemon, we don’t have a single word to uniquely describe the sound or effect. Words like press, puree, pulp, extract, and so forth each have their own meaning, but none of them fits perfectly. As for what happens after they are splootched…

3 (con’t) For they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet
On the day that I do this,
Says the Lord of hosts.

ki yihyu epher takhath kapoth raglekhem bayom asher ani oseh amar Y’hovah ts’vaoth

“‘For become ash under soles your feet,
In the day which I doing.’
Said Yehovah Sabaoth.”

When they are splootched out, there will be nothing left. Just as ashes under the soles of one’s foot disappear into nothingness, so it will be with the arrogant and the wicked.

Again, the intent is that this applies to the time when the Righteousness Sun shines upon a person. It is a timeframe, highlighted by the completion of Christ’s work, until the nation of Israel finally accepts Him.

Those who oppose the gospel, the arrogant and those doing wickedness, are being referred to as the recipients of the action by those who accept it.

The meaning isn’t that they will literally step on these people. Rather it is a metaphorical way of saying that the wicked will be regarded as if they were ashes under the soles of the feet. Those who fear the Lord and reckon His name (Malachi 3:17) will not have to worry that their fear of the Lord is in vain.

While the others were saying “Emptiness serving God,” (3:14), those who feared the Lord understood there is nothing futile or empty in their reverence of Him.

Remember what I have spoken
And apply it to your daily walk
Let My word be as a token
So that the two of us can talk

Without My word, we stand at odds
What kind of fellowship could we share
If you are out following other gods
Know with certainty, I would not be there

Remember the word that I have given
Keep it in context and things will go well
In My word are the details for true livin’
They’ll set you on the right path, keeping you from hell

II. Upon All Israel (verses 4-6)

“Remember the Law of Moses, My servant,

The verb is imperative: zikhru torath Mosheh avdi – “Remember! Law Moses, My servant.” The admonition is not for us today, as if we are to observe the law. Nor was it written for the Jews after Jesus’ coming, as if the law was still binding upon them.

The words were spoken to Israel at the time of Malachi. The law was in effect. It was to be obeyed. As such, no further revelation (more prophets coming to remind them of this) was to be expected.

The Lord has just promised that the Righteousness Sun was coming. That indicates quite clearly that the Law of Moses was not a Righteousness Sun. The law, as Paul openly states, was a tutor to lead us to Christ (Galatians 3:24).

In remembering the law and anticipating the promise set forth in Malachi, the people would then be prepared for the coming of Christ. Understanding this, the Lord continues with…

4 (con’t) Which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel,
With the statutes and judgments.

asher tsivithi otho b’khorev al kal Yisrael khuqim u-mishpatim

“Which commanded him in Horeb upon all Israel –
Enactments and judgments.”

The words could not be clearer. The verb is first person common singular. The Lord commanded (tsiviti – I commanded) Moses the enactments and judgments of the Law.

It wasn’t something that Moses conjured up on his own. Rather, it was the word of the Lord commanded by Him to and through Moses. As such, the words confirm the dating of the law. It cannot be that the law was penned much later if the Lord, through Malachi, states that He commanded it to Moses.

And more, it says that this was “in Horeb.” The words not only confirm the dating of the law but also the circumstances by which it came about. The words of Moses in Deuteronomy claim that the law was received in Horeb. The Lord confirms this through Malachi. And more, the law commanded “upon all Israel.”

Israel had agreed to the terms of the covenant. In doing so, they placed not only themselves under its precepts but the nation as an existing entity, meaning in its continuance throughout the generations. The law was a formal agreement that remained binding upon the nation and its people.

They had no right to amend it, walk away from it, disregard it, etc. If they attempted to do so, they would suffer the punishments detailed in it. And those punishments were sure to come unless they paid heed to what is next said…

Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet

hineh anokhi sholeakh lakehm eth Eliyah hanavi – “Behold! I sending to you Elijah the prophet.”

The words of verse 4 tell us that no further prophetic revelation was to be expected. The people were to remember the Law of Moses, meaning not only know what it said but also perform what it prescribed.

They would receive no more reminders or warnings. Instead, they had exactly what they needed to make the right choice and determination when the time arrived. When it arrived, the Lord promised to send Elijah the prophet.

As noted earlier, Jesus pinpointed the coming of John the Baptist with the promise of Elijah. However, when asked about who he was, John’s words appear to argue against that –

“Now this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, ‘Who are you?’
20 He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, ‘I am not the Christ.’
21 And they asked him, ‘What then? Are you Elijah?’
He said, ‘I am not.’
‘Are you the Prophet?’
And he answered, ‘No.’
22 Then they said to him, ‘Who are you, that we may give an answer to those who sent us? What do you say about yourself?’
23 He said: ‘I am
“The voice of one crying in the wilderness:
‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’”’
as the prophet Isaiah said.” John 1:19-23

This tells us that the idea of a succession of events concerning the words of Malachi concerning “the day” that is coming is correct. John was sent to fulfill the promise of Elijah’s return.

In Revelation 2:20, Jesus speaks of “that woman Jezebel.” This doesn’t mean Jezebel of the Old Testament book of Kings. And yet, He uses the name to identify this woman with her.

This is what Jesus did with John the Baptist. He identified John as the prophetic fulfillment of the one who would restore the people to proper law worship so that when Jesus came, He would be recognized as the One the law anticipated.

That calling did not end with John’s death. The message of John continues to this day in the pages of Scripture. Each Jew that reads and accepts his testimony concerning Jesus and then accepts Jesus is instructed by “Elijah” as referred to by Jesus.

And yet, the actual Elijah will return in fulfillment of the word of the Lord through Malachi. This is because Malachi explicitly states that Elijah will be sent because John explicitly said he is not Elijah, and because there will be two witnesses already identified in the Old Testament who will come to witness to the truth of God in Christ during the tribulation.

Although they are not named, a logical deduction of who each is can be made. First, in the Zechariah 4, it says –

“I am looking, and there is a lampstand of solid gold with a bowl on top of it, and on the stand seven lamps with seven pipes to the seven lamps. Two olive trees are by it, one at the right of the bowl and the other at its left.” Zechariah 4:2, 3

“Then I answered and said to him, ‘What are these two olive trees—at the right of the lampstand and at its left?’ 12 And I further answered and said to him, ‘What are these two olive branches that drip into the receptacles of the two gold pipes from which the golden oil drains?’

13 Then he answered me and said, ‘Do you not know what these are?
And I said, ‘No, my lord.’
14 So he said, ‘These are the two anointed ones, who stand beside the Lord of the whole earth.’” Zechariah 4:11-14

Later, in Revelation 11, these two are further described –

“And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.”
These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth. And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner. These have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy; and they have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to strike the earth with all plagues, as often as they desire.
When they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them. And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.” Revelation 11:3-8

As they were identified first in Zechariah, we know that they are from Old Testament times. As only two people from the Old Testament were taken by God and are still alive today, Enoch and Elijah, we can correctly deduce that they are the two witnesses.

As they will testify in Jerusalem (as noted, “where also our Lord was crucified”), the promise of the return of Elijah in Malachi will find its final fulfillment at that time, which is…

5 (con’t) Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.

liphne bo yom Y’hovah ha’gadol v’hanora

“To faces coming day Yehovah –
The whopping and the fearing.”

Again, there is a successive fulfillment of this. In their rejection of Christ Jesus after the testimony of John, Israel received the punishment of the curses of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. They continue to receive this with each rejection of Him today.

Each Jew who dies apart from Jesus will likewise face the great and dreadful day of the Lord when they stand before Him. But the nation as a whole will again have to face this decision with the coming of Elijah during the tribulation. He will instruct them just as John the Baptist did. Those who pay heed will find a different fate awaits them than those who fail to do so.

As you can see, the problem with explaining these verses with a single fulfillment of them is evident. It fails to take the whole of Scripture into consideration. John the Baptist came as a type of Elijah, identifying with his promised mission. Elijah himself will be sent to complete the process…

And he will turn
The hearts of the fathers to the children,
And the hearts of the children to their fathers,

v’heshiv lev avoth al banim v’lev banim al avotham

“And turned heart fathers upon sons,
And heart sons upon fathers.”

This is not a verse describing immediate family relations, as in, “He will turn the people in the families to love one another.” Rather, this is a word concerning the Hebrew people as a whole. The fathers are the patriarchs, especially Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

The children are those who have misunderstood both the promise to the patriarchs and the purpose of the law. The heart of the fathers was that of promise while trusting in the gospel of the grace of God. Paul explains this in Galatians 3 –

“And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, ‘In you all the nations shall be blessed.” So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham.’”

“And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect. 18 For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.” Galatians 3:8, 9, & 17, 18

The hearts of the children, the unbelievers of Israel, will have their hearts turned to the hearts of the fathers who trusted the gospel of Christ as a certain and sure promise. If they do not turn their hearts, the warning stands…

*6 (fin) Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.”

pen avo v’hikethi eth ha’arets kharem – “Lest come and strike the land – anathema.” The Old Testament, the time of man’s living under the curse of law, ends with the word kherem, anathema. It speaks of the utter destruction or ban of something. It is a fitting end to the thirty-nine books of law.

Only with the hope of God in Christ is there life and renewed fellowship with God. Only in understanding the gospel can that state be realized.

As with the whole chapter, these final words speak of a dual fulfillment. The first part of it came about when Israel rejected Jesus. He told them as much in Matthew 23:36, saying, “Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.”

The nation as a whole rejected Jesus, remained under law, and fell under the ban because of it. The second fulfillment will be for those of Israel who continue to reject Jesus during the tribulation. However, for the nation, that will eventually end. The land of Israel, symbolized by Jerusalem, was anathema because of Israel’s rejection of Jesus. This is seen in Zechariah 14:11 –

The people shall dwell in it;
And no longer shall there be utter destruction [kherem],
But Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited.”

This prophecy concerns the future when Israel finally receives Jesus. Only when the hearts of the children are turned to the hearts of the fathers will this time of woe for Israel end.

The day is coming, and the world is being readied for it with the return of Israel to her land. The nation has been reestablished, prophecies of the past have come to their fulfillment, and many more prophecies are set to be fulfilled.

The book is written, and these things will come about. We are simply spectators watching as the words of Scripture are faithfully realized, often before our own eyes. At some point, the rapture will take place and the attention of the Lord will be directed to bringing about the final restoration of Israel while also bringing about judgment upon all who refuse to believe.

Malachi sets forth both the hope of restoration and the warning of rejecting it. Though it is directed to Israel, for those who know Jesus, both Jews and Gentiles, we can learn from what is said here.

Our trust is not to be in the Law of Moses but in the One who is spoken of there and throughout all of Scripture. It is not easy to let go and place ourselves solely under the authority of another, but we must do so. If we are in need of surgery, we have to trust that the surgeon will get us through the ordeal.

In the case of our eternal souls, we have to let go of trusting in ourselves and look to the eternal gospel, which God has slowly and methodically revealed to the world through His word. And that gospel is centered completely and entirely on the Person of Jesus Christ.

Let us not fail to put our trust in Him. Anything else will not carry us through to the restoration that God offers to His people. Yes, let us trust solely in the merits of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

When everything fades,
My strength is no more.
I have nothing left.
Yet, I have it all!
Your goodness, your grace,
Still lives in me.
I don’t have to be afraid.
I still have this peace;

My Lord overcomes
The surges of storms.
When people’s hearts fail
He is still in control.
No waves high enough
Could cover the truth;
There is no storm
Stronger than You!

I sit in my pity,
In my fallen ways,
But my Lord is perfect!
So is his grace.
His love is sufficient!
His love floods my soul,
I’m saved in your arms
So please hold me, Lord.
Izabela Bednara, 9 October 2024

Closing Verse: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.” Revelation 22:21

Next Week: Wait and see

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He has sent His Messenger to carry the good news to all people. Jesus! God promised, and God delivered. The time of the law has ended, and grace has come. Praise God for Jesus.

Malachi 4:1-6 (CG)

For behold! The day coming:
Burning according to the firepot.
And became all the arrogant,
And all doing wickedness – stubble!
And licks them, the day, the coming,
Said Yehovah Sabaoth,
Which naught relinquishes to them root and branch.
2 And arose to you – fearful My name,
Sun Righteousness,
And a healing in its wings.
And gone out and spread according to calves a stall.
3 And splootched wicked,
For become ash under soles your feet,
In the day which I doing.
Said Yehovah Sabaoth.
4 Remember! Law Moses, My servant,
Which commanded him in Horeb upon all Israel –
Enactments and judgments.
5 Behold! I sending to you Elijah the prophet,
To faces coming day Yehovah –
The whopping and the fearing.
6 And turned heart fathers upon sons,
And heart sons upon fathers.
Lest come and strike the land – anathema.

 

Malachi 4:1-6 (NKJV)

“For behold, the day is coming,
Burning like an oven,
And all the proud, yes, all who do wickedly will be stubble.
And the day which is coming shall burn them up,”
Says the Lord of hosts,
“That will leave them neither root nor branch.
But to you who fear My name
The Sun of Righteousness shall arise
With healing in His wings;
And you shall go out
And grow fat like stall-fed calves.
You shall trample the wicked,
For they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet
On the day that I do this,
Says the Lord of hosts.

“Remember the Law of Moses, My servant,
Which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel,
With the statutes and judgments.
Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet
Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.
And he will turn
The hearts of the fathers to the children,
And the hearts of the children to their fathers,
Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.”