I.
Some
General Information About Song of Songs.
A. Many people tend to avoid the book
of Song of Songs, and some wonder why this book even made it into the
Bible. It is one of only two books in
the Bible where God is not mentioned even once (Esther is the other). There is
no mention of anything obviously spiritual in it, and its graphic description
of human sexuality has made it one of the most avoided books of the Bible in
the western Church. You would be hard pressed to find this book being taught in
Sunday school in a church somewhere!
B. Hebrew writing does not include any
adjectives, so phrases like "fantastic song" or "the greatest
song ever written" are not possible. Therefore, instead of "the greatest song", the expression
"Song of Songs" is used, just as "the Highest King" is
known as "King of Kings" and "the Greatest Lord" is called
"Lord of Lords".
C. Besides the fact that this is THE
Song of all songs, why is it in the Bible? In 1 Kings we learn that Solomon
wrote 1,005 songs, six of which made it into scripture (Psalms 72 and 127 for
example). David Pawson states:
"My theory is that
Solomon wrote a song for each of his 700 wives and 300 concubines, but of all
these 1,000 women, only one was God's choice for him, and so the song that he
wrote for her was the only love song that was published as part of the Bible.
The Song of Songs tells us that by the time he wrote the song he already had 60
wives."
D. Solomon wrote 3 books
of the Bible; Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs. What is interesting is
how the Jewish Rabbis viewed and treated these 3 books. They paralleled them to
Solomon's temple.
1. Proverbs was related to the outer courts
2. Ecclesiastes was
related to the inner courts
3. Song of Songs was
related to the Holy of Holies
E. The Jewish
Rabbis treated the Song of Songs as a very Holy book, they even called it the "Holy of
Holies", and would remove their shoes when reading it! As a side note; no
Jewish man was allowed to read it until the age of 40 because of its graphic
content. Our English translation is nowhere near as graphic as the original
Hebrew writings.
II.
Literal,
Allegory, or Analogy?
A. The
literal, or natural interpretation: This view emphasizes
biblical principles that honor the beauty of marital love. The natural
interpretation has grown in popularity in the last 100 years and has many good commentaries.
There are two views to the original story line.
1. The first tells of the Shulamite
maiden falling in love with a young shepherd whom she knows nothing about. They
fall deeply in love, yet she still knows nothing about him, she doesn't even
know where he takes his flock to graze. Finally he tells her that he has to
return home, but he will return for her. When he does return she finds out that
the young shepherd is also the king! He takes her away from the life of a
peasant and into the life of royalty.
2. The second tells the story of a
godly Shulamite maiden who is in love with a young shepherd boy and the evil
king Solomon tries to woo her away from her first love . However, she remains
faithful to the young shepherd.
B. Allegorical
interpretation: An allegory, as we all know, is a
fictional story with hidden truth. The truth is hidden within the characters,
events, and overall story line. Books such as Pilgrims Progress, The Chronicles
of Narnia, and Lord of the Rings
fall into this category. Therefore, it would be incorrect of us to approach
this book in that manner, for we know this is not a fictional story. There are some commentaries out there that
approach this book as an allegory and give meaning to things in the story with
no scriptural background whatsoever. This is dangerous! There are no hidden
meanings in the Song of Songs that will try to up root New Testament doctrine.
C. An
analogy: This would be the more correct way to describe the
method of application we are going to use during our discussion of this book. I
myself am guilty of referring to the analogy or "spiritual"
interpretation as the allegorical application. If you hear me say this, know
that I mean the spiritual interpretation.
III.
Why
is the spiritual interpretation a correct way to approach the Song of Songs?
A. The spiritual interpretation has
been used in different ways through history. Paul's treatment of the Hagar -
Sarah story is described by Paul as "symbolic" in the NKJV, as
"figurative" in the NIV, and as an "allegory" in the NAS
(considering the definition of allegory, it is an odd choice of words for the
translator to use).
"which things are symbolic.
For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which
gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar" Gal. 4:24 (NKJV)
"These things are being taken
figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount
Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar." (NIV)
"This is allegorically
speaking, for these women
are two covenants: one proceeding
from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar."
(NAS)
B. Paul's use of the Sarah - Hagar
story in Gal. 4:21-31 is more "figurative" (typology) instead of
"allegory". Paul's use of
allegory differed greatly from first-century Alexandrian philosopher
Philo as well as third-century philosopher Origin.
1.
Philo:
used philosophical allegory to attempt to fuse and harmonize Greek philosophy
with Hebrew scriptures (OT). His method followed the practices of both Jewish
exegesis and Stoic philosophy. He
believed that literal interpretations of the Hebrew Bible would suppress
mankind's view and perception of a God too complex and marvelous to be
understood in literal human terms.
2. Origin:
assimilated Greek philosophy to the Christian writings (NT). Origin's
significance derives not so much from the novelty of his thought but in the way
in which he applied and integrated platonic methods of epistemology (the way we
know things) to spiritual matters and his appropriation of biblical terms to
fundamentally Hellenistic concepts (or the other way around in some cases). For
he was not someone who merely claimed to be a Christian but was influenced by
his culture, he was a man who had the express purpose of merging Hellenistic
thought with revelation of scripture. Origin adhered to a specific brand of
philosophical tradition called Middle-Platonism, believing that it agreed with
and provided the framework necessary for interpreting the Bible.
"Beware lest anyone cheat
you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of
men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not
according to Christ."
Colossians 2:8 (NKJV).
C. Another
analogy in scripture would be in 1 Corinthians 9:9-10, Paul gave a spiritual
interpretation of the "muzzled ox" (Deut. 25:4) to apply to the
full-time workers in the gospel receiving finances.
D. Our
primary interpretation of Scripture must be the historical grammatical that
takes the Scripture at face value. We approach the Scripture this way unless
the Scripture indicates otherwise.
We will remain within these guidelines as we study Song of songs and use
scripture to interpret scripture.
IV.
Why
should we read Song of songs?
A. At
the heart of Christianity is a very personal relationship. Being a Christian is
not going to church, reading the Bible or supporting missionaries; being a
Christian is being in love with Jesus Christ our Bridegroom! The only point of
singing worship songs is that we are expressing our love for Him through song!
If we miss this, we have missed everything!
B. As
I've stated before; contrast the story of Mary of Bethany and Ephesus, Mary
pours out a love offering and she gets a memorial in heaven! While Ephesus in
all their works falls from their first love therefore lose their influence in
their region!
C. Is
it any wonder that at the heart of the Bible is a very intimate, loving
relationship between a King and His bride! Are not all of the Old Testament
prophets a reflection of this?
D. Look at Jeremiah
and his message, how many times did God say through Him, "Turn back! I
remember you! Turn your heart to me again!" Or through the life and
message of Hosea! And does not the Bible
crescendo into a wedding and the bride crying out to her Bridegroom
"Come!".
