When talking about the Song of Solomon, it’s not usual to discuss if it proves Solomon, and thus the Israelites, were black.

The usual question is: Can we read the Song of Solomon to our children? Is this only for married couples? Or is this about God and Israel, Christ and the church, etc.?

But today I’m going to come from a different angle. There are people and groups who say this book proves King Solomon was black. Although it’s about skin color.

Song of Solomon & A Mature Christian Perspective

From a mature Christian point of view, it will feel strange to think about this question. If King Solomon was black, or the Israelites were black, this doesn’t change the message of salvation.

When we put skin tone or nationality above salvation, we are like the Judaizers of the first century who thought the law of Moses saved. They got rebuked for their error. But everything always has to come back to the truth.

As a good Bible student, you must be willing to let the Bible say what it says. So, I’m going to start by quoting the two key verses in Song of Solomon used to prove King Solomon was black. Then I’m going to lay out the usual argument, and then I will break down why this is a big error according to the Bible.

Key Verses: Song of Solomon 1:5-6

“I [am] black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon. [6] Look not upon me, because I [am] black, because the sun hath looked upon me: my mother’s children were angry with me; they made me the keeper of the vineyards; [but] mine own vineyard have I not kept.”

It’s already clear what the big problem holding to this view is. But this is the logic:

Solomon is the author of the Song of Solomon. In Song of Solomon, it says, “I am black” two times. Thus, Solomon and his descendants are black.

Analysing the Argument

This is bad logic and even worse interpretation skills. Solomon did write the Song of Solomon, but to then assume the person saying “I am black” is Solomon is a leap. This is a leap that cannot get assumed but must get proved.

It’s like me saying, John wrote the Gospel of John, and in the Gospel of John, it says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

John wrote the Gospel, it says the Word was God in his Gospel, so John is the Word.

This is a crazy way of thinking and should never get done. It will lead you to faulty conclusions time and time again. But these kind of people are use to using illogical arguments. It removes the context, and context matters.

The Importance of Context

If you don’t have context and make those assumptions, you’re begging the question. This is a logical fallacy where you assume something is true before ever proving it. So I’m going to cover the first 8 verses in the Song of Solomon.

This will give you the context. I will also break down what it means, and show you the limits of the interpretation. You will see under no circumstances Solomon is black. But the end conclusions might shock you a little bit.

Song Of Solomon Chapter 1

Starting with verse 1, it says,

“The song of songs, which [is] Solomon’s.”

This sets the scene for us as we start reading the book. Like many of the Psalms start with attribution to an author like David. Like the prophets start with attribution, the Song of Solomon begins the same way. This is Solomon’s Song. This is his greatest Song. And that’s how it gets the name the Song of Songs.

To give you a little more context, it talks about Israel, the King, and other things. This makes it clear this is King Solomon’s Song, not some other person with the same name.

First Kings also says that Solomon wrote hundreds of songs too (1 Kings 4:32). That gives us different angles pointing back to King Solomon. There are always critical scholars who say Solomon didn’t write this. For the sake of this post though, it’s not relevant.

Now listen to verse 2 and it’s the start of the problem for people who use the faulty logic I mentioned earlier. Look at what it says:

“Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love [is] better than wine.“

Love and Context

Although Solomon is writing this, he is not writing in the Song that he is asking another man to kiss him with his mouth, or that another man’s love was better than wine. That would be absurd for any righteous king in Israel.

Talking about love, not the kissing, between two men in this way isn’t by itself evil. Context matters, remember.

David and Jonathan had a great friendship. Their love for each other was great. But the context was different. The context of the Song of Solomon isn’t about two friends.

The context of the Song of Solomon is about two lovers. You can already see the problems once you get to the 2nd verse of the Song. But it gets worse.

It’s clear as you read this, in Solomon’s Song, he is writing it from the perspective of a man and a woman. This would be like reading Romeo and Juliet by Shakespeare. Shakespeare writes from the angle of Romeo and also the angle of Juliet. This is what King Solomon is doing in the Song of Solomon.

The Characters in the Song

There are other characters in the Song, I’ll mention this shortly. To make things easy, I’m only focusing on the man and woman in the Song.

The woman continues speaking in verse 3 when she says,

“Because of the savour of thy good ointments thy name [is as] ointment poured forth, therefore do the virgins love thee.”

She is praising her man and saying why all the young women love him. But if we follow the faulty logic from the beginning, this would be King Solomon praising another man for all the young women loving him.

This bad logic takes us into a deeper pit as we move to verse 4.

“Draw me, we will run after thee: the king hath brought me into his chambers: we will be glad and rejoice in thee, we will remember thy love more than wine: the upright love thee.”

Solomon is not asking another man to draw him close. Solomon is not revealing that a king took him into his chamber. Solomon is not saying he was rejoicing and remembered the time in the chamber more than wine.

This is what we call in logic a reductio ad absurdum. This sort of interpretation of the Bible leads to absurdity.

Handling God’s Word

I know this is strong language, but God’s Word should never get handled this way.

This is the woman excited to see her husband and to enjoy the fruits of marriage. Some commentators believe the woman is not speaking in all verse 4. It’s possible. But also possible the woman is speaking the whole way through. But this isn’t an opportunity to think ahhhh the man is now speaking before we move to the key verses next.

If it is not the woman speaking for the whole verse, part of the verse turns to the young women in Jerusalem. It remains a female voice, not a man.

Now, in context, listen to verse five:

“I [am] black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.”

Understanding the Speaker

Again, with all we know at this point, King Solomon is not saying he is black like his own curtains. It’s not impossible to speak in the third person, but the context doesn’t agree here. It’s the same speaker from verse two up till this point. She says to the daughters of Jerusalem, she is black.

Then she says, but beautiful. It’s easy to think she is unhappy with her skin tone, as if blackness is a bad thing. That’s not her point, at least in the way you might think. She explains in the next verse as she keeps talking.

“Look not upon me, because I [am] black, because the sun hath looked upon me: my mother’s children were angry with me; they made me the keeper of the vineyards; [but] mine own vineyard have I not kept.”

She is black, or dark because of a sun-tan. She’s been working the fields all day and is now sun-tanned. This seems strange today where women love to be out in the sun.

Women these days, especially in the UK, will go to tanning booths to get tanned. But in those days, tanning showed you were of lesser means. It indicated you were a laborer outside, instead of from wealth.

Sun-tanning actually implies she’s of a lighter skin tone to start, not a darker one. She was likely of Middle Eastern skin tone, olive skin, and got darker.

Following the Text

You don’t have to hate black people to acknowledge this. It’s simple, follow the text and come to the best conclusion based on what you read in the text. In verse7, look at what she says:

“Tell me, O thou whom my soul loveth, where thou feedest, where thou makest [thy flock] to rest at noon: for why should I be as one that turneth aside by the flocks of thy companions?”

She wants to meet her man where his flock is, not end up in another man’s place. She asks, where do you look after your sheep? Then the conversation switches to the man in the Song as he speaks for the first time in verse 8.

“If thou know not, O thou fairest among women, go thy way forth by the footsteps of the flock, and feed thy kids beside the shepherds’ tents.”

He tells her where to find him. And the conversation goes on like this throughout. Song of Solomon doesn’t prove King Solomon was black. It’s talking about blackness that comes from the sun, which is sun-tanning for a woman.

What If Its Not Sun-Tan?

Let’s say this wasn’t talking about sun-tan, but talking about skin. At best, this would mean this woman was black, of a darker skin tone, not Solomon. This has little if anything to do with Solomon’s skin tone or Israelites as a whole.

Think about this: Solomon married a thousand women. It shouldn’t surprise you if he married many women with different skin complexions. His heir Rehoboam was from an Ammonite woman, different from the description of the woman discussed in the Song of Solomon.

Let me know if you have anything you want me to cover in the Bible. Until next time, thanks for reading and God bless.

Watch The Video