Perrydox.com is devoted to the pursuit of truth, whether plain or paradoxical, whether simple or sublime, or simply absurd yet absolute.
Ecclesiastes 2:8 – Many Concubines
Shiddah weshiddoth, occurs only here in the O.T. The KJV translates this as, musical instruments. “The difficult words {shiddah weshiddoth} are variously rendered. The LXX. have [oinocoon kai oinochoas] “male and female cup-bearers,” with which the Syriac and Arabic and Parkhurst agree; Aquila, [kulikon kai kulikia] “a cup and smaller cups;” Jerome, {scyphos et urceolos, (Vulg. {urceos,}) “goblets and pots;” Targum, “warm and cold baths;” others, as M. Desvoeux, “male and female captives;” others, “cooks and confectioners;” others, “a species of musical compositions,” derived from Sido, a celebrated Phoenician woman, to whom Sanchoniatho attributes the invention of music; but others, with more probability, “wives and concubines;” and {siddoth} may be in this sense synonymous with the Arabic {seedat, domina, conjux} from {sada,} in {Conj. V. conjugium inivit.} Of the former, Solomon had three hundred, and of the latter, seven hundred; and if they are not mentioned here they are not mentioned at all, which is wholly unaccountable.” (Treasury of Scripture Knowledge)
Whatever this is, it is the “pleasures of men.” I doubt musical instruments would be defined as the “pleasures of men.”
Now for some observations:
1) I am sure the reason why the same word for wife and concubine can be also translated musical instrument has to be intriguing!
2) If the translation here is not concubines, then this experiment of Solomon is wholly lacking in an activity which is often experimented in by people trying to find happiness.
3) Context means everything, but often we can read too much into context. Whether meaningful or not, notice where Solomon places “the pleasures of men – many concubines.” It is not listed above with the other physical pleasures, but rather this particular “pleasures of men” is listed with the possessions. Yes, the concubines were pleasurable, but also they were possessions. Considering the mindset of wayward men, this fits perfectly with the concept some men have in conquering women through sex. To them, sex is not an expression of love, but a self-delusional manifestation of power and possession.
Concerning the other women in Solomon’s life, his wives (700 wives and 300 concubines), let us also apply a lesson. For background information, let’s read 1 Kngs.11:1-2:
1 Kings 11:1-2
Now King Solomon loved many foreign women along with the daughter of Pharaoh: Moabite, Ammonite, Edomite, Sidonian, and Hittite women, [2] from the nations concerning which the Lord had said to the sons of Israel, “You shall not associate with them, nor shall they associate with you, for they will surely turn your heart away after their gods.” Solomon held fast to these in love.
The word, love (0157. bha ‘ahab, aw-hab’ or raheb {aw-habe’}; a primitive root), means, “to have affection for (sexually or otherwise):–(be-)love(-d, -ly, -r), like, friend.” (Strong’s). Wilson gives the following definition: “to love that in which a man delights, or which he earnestly desires; it implies ardent and vehement inclination of the mind, at the same time tenderness and fullness of affection, and is to be taken in the same extensive sense as the English word ‘love;’ and is used of the unspeakable love and tender mercies of God in covenant with his people.” (Wilson’s Old Testament Word Studies, p.260.) People, not just men, often turn to sex, or love and marriage as a way to fulfill themselves. While there is a sense in which marriage does fulfill (Gen.2), there is also a sense in which a relationship with another turns dangerous. How? Because we look to them, and instead of God, to fill the deepest needs.
Comments