Song Of Solomon – unplugged

Recently, I was tasked with developing a tutorial on the following assignment:

Augustine stated; “Nothing is so much to be shunned as sexual relations”. Yet the Song of Solomon has been interpreted as a ‘poetic delight’ in the sexuality of a man and a woman. What are the implications of such an interpretation of the Song of Solomon for Christ-followers today?

Here is a copy of my tutorial paper!

 

 Introduction

 

In the NIV ‘introductions to the books of the Bible’ it simply states that the Song of Songs is a collection of love poems between a lover and his beloved. It is a beautiful picture of ideal human love and marriage. The Hebrew title is The Song of Songs – That is, the best, ‘the most beautiful of songs’. (Wright, 1983:64)

 

There are many that would disagree with that thought, and over the years have vigorously defended their viewpoint. Even as late as AD 90, there was still debate as to whether or not it should be included in the Canon at all. (Carr, 1984:16)

 

 

My approach to this broad subject will be to look briefly at, 1. What is the Song of Solomon? 2. Why it is still relevant for Christ-followers, and highlight some of the misguided teaching that has for many, caused self-imposed limitations on who God created them to be.

 

What is the Song of Solomon?

 

In Chris Wrights, Bible Study commentary on the Song of Solomon, he says that there are two main ways ‘the Song’is interpreted.

1. Allegorical. It is included in Scripture because Jewish Rabbis treated it as a description of the love relationship between God and his people. Christian interpreters embraced that idea, and related it as being about Christ and his Bride, the Church.

2. Literal. It was written about the passion of human sexual love…which presents physical love (Eros) and its accompanying emotions as things of intense delight, beauty and power. (Wright, 1983:64)

What has Solomon got to do with ‘the Song’?

 

No one knows who wrote the Song, Some would suggest that it is not about Solomon at all. Nevertheless, Solomon is mentioned in ‘the Song’ seven times, but that ‘the’ Solomon had an actual role in ‘the Song’ is a matter of conjecture and ongoing argument. (Gledhill, 1994:22)

 

 

 The Context for ‘the Song’

 

In Tom Gledhill’s book, The Message of the Song of Songs – “the Lyrics of Love” he says that “the Song of Songs is a literary creation. It is a love-song of haunting beauty; it was meant to be sung as a celebration of love, beauty and intimacy”. The song is cyclic and repetitious.

 

“A song creates an atmosphere in which we are invited to participate. In listening to the Song, we find that it is speaking not only to us, but about us”. (Gledhill, 1994:19)

 

 

Allegorical? Literal?

 

 

The Council of Constantinople in AD 550 outlawed the literal reading of the Song of Songs, insisting that an allegorical interpretation as the only right interpretation. (Provan, 2001:238)   Scholars like Gregory of Nyssa, Jerome, Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph, Theodore, Hippolytus, Origen and John Wesley each played their part in dismissing a literal understanding of the Song.

A man of deep conviction…

 

 

This Allegorization worldview held by the ‘church fathers’ ensured that earth and heaven, flesh and spirit, remained separated. Origen’s stance / actions regarding these reveal a man of deep conviction and provide the best insight into the worldview described here. (Provan, 2001:243)

 

 

Contrarily, ‘Hebrew people believed that they were to live their lives in the presence of a present YHWH’. ‘Hebrew people did not separate the sacred from the secular, YHWH was in everything’ (lecture by Ron White, 2007)

 

Unfortunately, men like Origen, Augustine and others, by means of their teaching have impacted humankind with their biased, narrow minded approach to human sexuality. So much so, that countless numbers of people through the ages have been caught up ‘condemned’ by ‘ungodly desires’, imprisoned by ill-informed choices, trapped in unwanted spinsterhood / bachelorhood or cloaked in the secrecy of undesirable addictions.

Robbed of God’s intention for human sexuality…

 

Mankind has been robbed since the Middle Ages of God’s intention for human sexuality, “through the well-meaning but sadly misguided teaching of a group of celibate men”. (Chant, 1983:114)

 

 

Sadly, had these so called ‘authorities’ hearkened to James’s instruction where he says; ‘Not many of us should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly’ (Jas 3:1 NIV), just maybe we would live a life, much more as God intended – in ‘true freedom’.

God is always about redemption…

 

 

Thankfully there have been other voices in the wilderness, who speak of a more balanced approach (without the extreme of self-harm) with regard to this delicate topic. One of those voices, Barry Chant says, ‘When the Almighty God created man & woman, he created them both with the capacity to enjoy their sexual relationship to the full!’ (Chant, 1983:114, emphasis added)

 

‘There is one book of the Bible that is devoted solely to the question of married love; it is the Song of Solomon’. In Barry Chants book, “Straight Talk about Marriage”, he goes on to say; ‘many people have gone to great lengths to avoid this notion. To them, it seems unspiritual, somehow, that a book of the Bible should deal exclusively with the sexual side of marriage’ (Chant, 1983:216)

 

One must not reject an allegorical or a literal interpretation of the Song of Songs outright, but the simplest view is that the book is a series of love songs between a human bridegroom and his young bride. (Chant, 1983:217)

 

The Reverend G. Lloyd Carr adds weight to this literal view: The believing Christian comes to the Bible with the faith that it is God’s Word to mankind. But we are more than merely ‘spiritual’ beings; we are human. If God is concerned about our human condition – and the incarnation makes it plain that he is – his revelation will be concerned with every aspect of that condition. And that includes human sexuality. (1984:9)

 

The problem with an allegorical interpretation of ‘the Song’ is that a believer needs to be rather careful in our use of such analogies. For the believer’s relationship with Christ is never at an erotic level. (Gledhill, 1994:33)

 

E.J. Young says: The Song does celebrate the dignity and purity of human love… it reminds us, in particularly beautiful fashion, how pure and noble true love is. This, however, does not exhaust the purpose of the book. Not only does it speak of the purity of human love, but, by its very inclusion in the Canon, it reminds us of a love that is purer than our own. (Provan, 2001:255)

Conclusion

It is relevant to Christ-followers because…

 

God created mankind with relationship in mind. He created male and female with not only emotional and spiritual means of connecting in relationship, but also the ability to procreate and connect biologically with joy.

 

As a Christ-follower it is important to be grounded in His ‘word’ written as instruction for life, including our sexuality and its expressions.

 

Bibliography

 

Augustine, Saint, Marriage and Virginity (New City Press, NY, published 1999)

Carr, G. Lloyd, The Song of Solomon (Tyndale Old Testament Commentary, IVP, 1984).

Chant, Barry, Straight Talk About Marriage (The House of Tabor, 1983)

Corothers, Merlin, What’s on Your Mind? (Kingsway Publications, 1984)

LaSor, William Sanford, Old Testament Survey – Second Edition (Wm.B.Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996)

Pope, M.H., The Song of Songs (Anchor Bible, Doubleday, 1977)

Provan, Iain, The NIV Application Commentary – Ecclesiastes & Song of Songs (Zondervan Publishing House, 2001)

Sullivan, Clayton, Rescuing Sex from the Christians, (Continuum International Publishing Group, 2006)

Wright, Chris, Bible Study Commentary – Proverbs – Isaiah 39 (Scripture Union, London, 1983)

Young, E. J., An Introduction to the Old Testament (London: Tyndale, 1949)