were frequently attached as prefixes to the father’s name, giving the son a surname, as Bar-Jesus (“son of Jesus”). (Acts 13:6) Some versions leave the prefix untranslated; others translate it in most cases; some give the translation in the margin. Or the prefix may be attached to the name because of the circumstances surrounding the birth of the child, as Benammi, meaning “son of my people,” that is, son of my relatives and not the son of foreigners; or Benoni, meaning “son of my sorrow,” Benjamin being so named by his dying mother Rachel.—Gen. 19:38; 35:18.

DESCRIPTIVE USE

Additionally, the word “sons” frequently serves a descriptive purpose, as: Orientals (literally, “sons of the East” [1 Ki. 4:30; Job 1:3, NW, 1957 ed., ftn.]); “anointed ones” (literally, “sons of the oil” [Zech. 4:14, NW, 1960 ed,, ftn.]); members (“sons”) of occupational classes, as, “sons of the prophets” (1 Ki. 20:35) or, “a member [“son”] of the ointment mixers” (Neh. 3:8); returned exiles (“sons of the Exile”) (Ezra 10:7, 16, NW, 1955 ed., ftns.); good-for-nothing men scoundrels (“sons of Belial”). (Judg. 19:22; 20:13, NW, 1953 ed., ftns.) Those who pursue a certain course of conduct, or who manifest a certain characteristic, are designated by such expressions as “sons of the Most High,” “sons of light and sons of day,” “sons of the kingdom,” “sons of the wicked one,” “son of the Devil,” “sons of disobedience.” (Luke 6:35; 1 Thess. 5:5; Matt. 13:38; Acts 13:10; Eph. 2:2) So, too, with the judgment or outcome that corresponds with the characteristic, as, “a subject for Gehenna” (literally, “a son of Gehenna”); “the son of destruction.” (Matt. 23:15; John 17:12; 2 Thess. 2:3) Isaiah, who prophesied God’s chastisement of Israel called the nation “my threshed ones and the son of my threshing floor.”—Isa. 21:10.

SONS OF GOD

Angels, created by God, are sons of God. (Job 1:6; 38:7) Adam as a creation of God was a son of God. (Luke 3:38) Those judges and rulers in Israel against whom God’s word came were called “sons of the Most High,” doubtless because they held office in Israel as representing the divine rule, though they had transgressed. (Ps. 82:6) Those whom God selects to be joint heirs with his Son Jesus Christ are called “God’s sons.”—Rom. 8:14-17.

SONG

About one-tenth of the entire Bible is song, the foremost examples being the Psalms, The Song of Solomon and Lamentations. While the Scriptures do refer to secular songs, songs of contempt and of seduction, the majority of its some three hundred references to the subject relate to the worship of Jehovah God. In the main, singing is associated with joy, as when the disciple James wrote: “Is there anyone in good spirits? Let him sing psalms [songs of praise to God].” (Jas. 5:13) Songs expressing sorrow might more properly be termed dirges.—Amos 8:10; see DIRGE.

The first song recorded in the Bible was that sung by Moses and the men of Israel, to which Miriam and the women responded, upon their deliverance at the Red Sea. (Ex. 15:1-21) Among others are Moses’ farewell song, Deborah and Barak’s victory song and David’s dirge lamenting the death of Saul and his dear friend Jonathan. (Deut. 31:30; 32:1-43; Judg. 5:1-31; 2 Sam. 1:17-27) Additional compositions of David number at least seventy-three of the Psalms. The Bible also refers to the “song of Jehovah,” mentioned in connection with Hezekiah’s restoration of pure worship, and the ‘song of Moses and the Lamb.’—2 Chron. 29:27; Rev. 15:3, 4.

References to a “new song” appear not only in the Psalms but also in the writings of Isaiah and the apostle John. (Ps. 33:3; 40:3; 96:1; 98:1; 144:9; 149:1; Isa. 42:10; Rev. 5:9; 14:3) An examination of the context surrounding most occurrences of the expression “new song” reveals that such is sung because of a new development in Jehovah’s exercise of his universal sovereignty. As joyfully proclaimed in the ninety-sixth Psalm, verse 10: “Jehovah himself has become king.” The new developments in Jehovah’s extension of his kingship, as well as what these signify for heaven and earth, appear to be the subject of this “new song.”—Ps. 96:11-13; 98:9; Isa. 42:10, 13.

SONG OF SOLOMON, THE

A poetic book of the Hebrew Scriptures that tells of the unswerving love of a Shulammite girl (a country girl from Shunem, or Shulem) for a shepherd boy and King Solomon’s unsuccessful attempt to capture her love. The opening words of the Hebrew text designate this poem as “the song of songs,” that is, a “superlative song,” the most beautiful, the most excellent song. It is but one song and not a collection of songs.

At the outset Solomon is identified as the writer. (Song of Sol. 1:1) Internal evidence agrees with this, for it reveals the writer to have been one who was well acquainted with God’s creation, as was Solomon. (1 Ki. 4:29-33) Repeatedly plants, animals and precious stones and metals figure in the vivid imagery of the book. (1:12-14, 17; 2:1, 3, 7, 9, 12-15; 4:8, 13, 14; 5:11-15; 7:2, 3, 7, 8, 11-13) The writer, as would be expected from a king like Solomon, was very familiar with the land inhabited by the Israelites—the coastal plain, the low plains (2:1), the mountain ranges of Lebanon, Hermon, Anti-Lebanon and Carmel (4:8; 7:5), the vineyards of En-gedi (1:14) and “the pools in Heshbon, by the gate of Bath-rabbim.”—7:4.

The poem was composed when Solomon had sixty queens and eighty concubines. (Song of Sol. 6:8) This points to the earlier part of his forty-year reign (1037-997 B.C.E.), since Solomon finally came to have seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines.—1 Ki. 11:3.

The expressions of endearment contained in The Song of Solomon may seem very unusual to the Western reader. But it should be remembered that the setting for this song is an Oriental one of about three thousand years ago.

PERSONS INVOLVED

The central figure of The Song of Solomon is the Shulammite. Other persons mentioned in the poem are her shepherd lover (Song of Sol. 1:7) and her mother and brothers (1:6; 8:2), King Solomon (3:11), the “daughters of Jerusalem” (the ladies of Solomon’s court) and the “daughters of Zion” (women residents of Jerusalem). (3:5, 11) The individuals can be differentiated by what they say of themselves or by what is said to them. In the Hebrew text, grammatical forms often imply gender (masculine or feminine) as well as number (singular or plural), thereby facilitating identification of the characters. To make this distinction evident in the English language it is often necessary to add clarifying words to convey fully the meaning of the original. Thus at The Song of Solomon 1:5 the Hebrew reads literally: “Black I and comely.” However, the Hebrew words for “black” and “comely” are in the feminine gender. Therefore the New World Translation reads: “A black girl I am, but comely.”

THE DRAMA

The Shulammite met the shepherd at the place of his birth. (Song of Sol. 8:5b) Jealous for the chastity of their sister, the brothers of the Shulammite tried to protect her from temptation. Therefore, when she wanted to accept her lover’s invitation to join him in viewing the beauties of early spring (2:8-14), they became angry with her and, taking advantage of the seasonal need, appointed her to guard the vineyards against the depredations of the little foxes. (1:6; 2:15) Exposed to the sun’s rays, the Shulammite lost the fairness of her skin.—1:5, 6.

Later, while on her way to the garden of nut trees, she unintentionally came upon the encampment of King Solomon. (Song of Sol. 6:11, 12) Either seen there by the king himself or noticed by someone else and then recommended to him, the Shulammite was brought to Solomon’s camp. King Solomon made known his admiration for her. But she felt no attraction for him and voiced a longing for her shepherd lover. (1:2-4, 7) The “daughters of Jerusalem” therefore recommended that she leave the camp and find her lover. (1:8) Solomon, however, was unwilling to let her go and began praising her beauty, promising to fashion circlets of gold and studs of silver for her. (1:9-11) The Shulammite then informed the king that the object of her love was someone else.—1:12-14.

Thereafter the Shulammite’s shepherd lover came to Solomon’s camp and voiced his affection for her. She, too, assured him of her love. (Song of Sol. 1:15–2:2) When speaking to the “daughters of Jerusalem,” the Shulammite compared her lover to a fruit tree among the trees of the forest and solemnly charged them by what was beautiful and graceful not to try to arouse unwanted love in her. (2:3-7) Always, even during the night hours, she continued to long for her shepherd lover, and she reminded the “daughters of Jerusalem” that they were under oath not to attempt to awaken love in her until it felt inclined.—2:16–3:5.

Returning to Jerusalem, Solomon took the Shulammite along. Seeing the procession approaching the city, several “daughters of Zion” commented about the appearance of the cortege. (Song of Sol. 3:6-11) At Jerusalem, the shepherd lover, having followed the procession, got in touch with the Shulammite and praised her beauty, thereby assuring her of his love. (4:1-5) The Shulammite voiced her desire to leave the city (4:6), and he continued expressing his admiration for her. (4:7-16a) “Let my dear one come into his garden and eat its choicest fruits,” she said. (4:16b) His response to this invitation was: “I have come into my garden, O my sister, my bride.” (5:1a) Women of Jerusalem encouraged them, saying: “Eat, O companions! Drink and become drunk with expressions of endearment!”—5:1b.

When the Shulammite, after having a bad dream, related it to the “daughters of Jerusalem” and told them that she was lovesick (Song of Sol. 5:2-8), they wanted to know what was so special about her dear one. At that the Shulammite proceeded to describe her lover in glowing terms. (5:10-16) Asked by them where he was, she informed them that he was shepherding among the gardens. (6:1-3) Once again Solomon confronted the Shulammite with expressions of praise. (6:4-10) Told that she had not sought his company (6:11, 12), Solomon appealed to her to come back. (6:13a) This prompted her to ask: “What do you people behold in the Shulammite?” (6:13b) Solomon used this as an opening to express further admiration for her. (7:1-9) But the Shulammite remained changeless in her love and called upon the “daughters of Jerusalem” not to awaken love in her when it did not feel inclined to come forth spontaneously.—7:10–8:4.

Apparently Solomon then allowed the Shulammite to return to her home. Seeing her approaching, her brothers asked: “Who is this woman coming up from the wilderness, leaning upon her dear one?” (Song of Sol. 8:5a) The brothers of the Shulammite had not realized that their sister had such constancy in love. In earlier years one brother had said concerning her: “We have a little sister that does not have any breasts. What shall we do for our sister on the day that she will be spoken for?” (8:8) Another brother replied: “If she should be a wall, we shall build upon her a battlement of silver; but if she should be a door, we shall block her up with a cedar plank.” (8:9) However, since the Shulammite had successfully resisted all enticements, being satisfied with her own vineyard and remaining loyal in her affection for her lover (8:6, 7, 11, 12), she could properly say: “I am a wall, and my breasts are like towers. In this case I have become in his eyes like her that is finding peace.”—8:10.

The song concludes with the desire expressed by her shepherd lover to hear her voice (Song of Sol. 8:13) and she desired that he come leaping, crossing the mountains that separated them.—8:14.

VALUE

The Song of Solomon illustrates the beauty of enduring and constant love. Such unswerving love is reflected in the relationship of Christ Jesus and his bride. (Eph. 5:25-32) Thus The Song of Solomon can serve to encourage those professing to be of Christ’s bride to remain faithful to their heavenly bridegroom.—Compare 2 Corinthians 11:2.

See the book “All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial,” pp. 115-117.

SON(S) OF GOD

The expression “Son of God” primarily identifies Christ Jesus. Consideration here is given initially to others also called “sons of God.”

“SONS OF THE TRUE GOD”

The first mention of “sons of the true God” is at Genesis 6:2-4. There such sons are spoken of as ‘beginning to notice the daughters of men, that they were good-looking; and they went taking wives for themselves, namely, all whom they chose,’ this prior to the global flood.

Many commentators hold that these ‘sons of God’ were themselves human, being in reality men of the line of Seth. They base their argument on the fact that Seth’s line was that through which godly Noah came, whereas the other lines from Adam, that of Cain and those of any other sons born to Adam (Gen. 5:3, 4), were destroyed at the Flood. So, they say that the taking as wives “the daughters of men” by the “sons of the true God” means that Sethites began to marry into the line of wicked Cain.

There is, however, nothing to show that God made any such distinction between family lines at this point. Corroborating Scriptural evidence is lacking to support the view that intermarriage between the lines of Seth and Cain is what is here meant, or that such marriages were responsible for the birth of “mighty ones” as mentioned in verse four. It is true that the expression “sons of men [or “of mankind”]” (which those favoring the earlier mentioned view would contrast with the expression ‘sons of God’) is frequently used in an unfavorable sense, but this is not consistently so.—Compare Psalm 4:2; 57:4; Proverbs 8:22, 30, 31; Jeremiah 32:18, 19; Daniel 10:16.

Angelic sons of God

On the other hand, there is an explanation that finds corroborating evidence in the Scriptures. The expression “sons of the true God” next occurs at Job 1:6 and here the reference is obviously to spirit sons of God, assembled in God’s presence, among whom Satan, who had been “roving about in the earth,” also appeared. (Job 1:7; see also 2:1, 2.) Again at Job 38:4-7 the “sons of God” who ‘shouted in applause’ when God ‘laid the cornerstone’ of the earth clearly were angelic sons and not humans descended from Adam (as yet not even created). So, too, at Psalm 89:6 the “sons of God” are definitely heavenly creatures, not earthlings.

The identification of the “sons of the true God” at Genesis 6:2-4 with angelic creatures is objected to by those holding the previously mentioned view because they say the context relates entirely to human wickedness. This objection is not valid, however, since the wrongful interjection of spirit creatures in human affairs most certainly could contribute to or accelerate the growth of human wickedness. Wicked spirit creatures in Jesus’ time on earth, though not then materializing in visible form, were responsible for wrong human conduct of an extreme nature. (See DEMON; DEMON POSSESSION.) The mention of a mixing into human affairs by angelic sons of God