Song of Songs

[Steven Yeadon]

I have been reading about a load of controversy in Evangelical circles about teaching Song of Songs. Mainly centered around Mark Driscoll's controversial teachings that dwell on parts of the Song that talk of the sexual, making them tawdry through his jokes and commentary. Then again there are those that argue, quite vociferously, that the Song is not talking of the sensuality and eroticism of marriage and could not be. To them the Song is allegory.

Upon reading on this subject, I was shocked. For years it seemed people were getting on board with an erotic Song of Songs that talks of the sensual. This controversy seems to have made controversial what is needed in this society for my age group and myself. A solid communication of romantic love, sex, and marriage to a generation lacking a basic authoritative discussion of the birds and the bees that at the same time is awash in sexual sin.

My opinion is that the Song is erotic, though not explicit and has a sexual ethic that is in line with the Garden: Just enjoy each other and have fun. It is erotic and thus stirs up the imagination, but also warns of the need for marriage and the need to not stir up arousal before it is time. It makes innocent what so many, not just in the culture but in church, call tawdry. It also speaks of romantic love in a way that truly understands it.

I was too much like Driscoll in the back of my head, but reading parts of the Song has settled my view. I struggled with this in order to understand things, and I wanted to see the BBs take on all of this.

 

[Steven Yeadon]

I figured I should explain I am using the denotation of "explicit" and "erotic."

Explicit - stated clearly and in detail, leaving no room for confusion or doubt.

Song of Songs may have "I am a wall, and my breasts are like towers" at 8:10a, but it keeps the clearly erotic imagery poetic and not explicit, leaving things to the imagination.

Erotic - relating to or tending to arouse sexual desire or excitement.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

bI find it impossible to believe that the Song of Solomon is a sort of ancient Hebrew soft porn.
I believe that we have to look at the Song with spiritual eyes and see the mutual love of Christ and His Church, just as we see in Psalm 45. When John Gill became Pastor of the Baptist Church at Horse Lie Down (Horsley Down) in London in 1720, Unitarianism was rampant in England. Gill believed that the Song was one of the best texts for showing the Deity of Christ, so he spent a few years preaching through it.

A Jewish commentator wrote that the Song resembled a treasure chest to which the key had been locked. I believe that the key is Christ. He is the Beloved and the bride or Shulamite is the Church or the individual believer.

I have only ever preached one sermon on the Song. It was on 5:2-6:3, which I take to be one section. I don't have my sermon notes to hand but, very briefly, it went something like this. The bride, through spiritual slothfulness, loses communion with Christ for a season. She goes about to seek Him, but cannot find Him. She speaks to her church leaders (the watchmen), who point out her sin to her and strip her of her excuses (taking away the veil). She tells her friends about her loss, but they don't understand and ask her why she is so bothered. She then tells them why Christ is so special to her, and as she tells them, she suddenly knows where to find Him. It is in the church, where Christ feeds His flock among the lilies (the saints).

In Chapter 3, which seems similar at first, it is Christ who sovereignly breaks communion with the bride, to test her (Proverbs 17:3), but as she shows her constancy by continuing to seek Him, He returns.

I would get a good, older commentary or look at the sermons on the Song by people like Spurgeon or M'Cheyne. Don't dwell too much on details or you may end up getting too fanciful. Look for Christ (John 5:39).

There is one good modern commentary which I can recommend. It is He is altogether Lovely: Discovering Christ in the Song of Solomon by Roger Ellsworth (ISBN 0-85234-406-6).

 

[Steven Yeadon]

I find it impossible to believe that the Song of Solomon is a sort of ancient Hebrew soft porn.
I believe that we have to look at the Song with spiritual eyes and see the mutual love of Christ and His Church, just as we see in Psalm 45. When John Gill became Pastor of the Baptist Church at Horse Lie Down (Horsley Down) in London in 1720, Unitarianism was rampant in England. Gill believed that the Song was one of the best texts for showing the Deity of Christ, so he spent a few years preaching through it.

A Jewish commentator wrote that the Song resembled a treasure chest to which the key had been locked. I believe that the key is Christ. He is the Beloved and the bride or Shulamite is the Church or the individual believer.

I have only ever preached one sermon on the Song. It was on 5:2-6:3, which I take to be one section. I don't have my sermon notes to hand but, very briefly, it went something like this. The bride, through spiritual slothfulness, loses communion with Christ for a season. She goes about to seek Him, but cannot find Him. She speaks to her church leaders (the watchmen), who point out her sin to her and strip her of her excuses (taking away the veil). She tells her friends about her loss, but they don't understand and ask her why she is so bothered. She then tells them why Christ is so special to her, and as she tells them, she suddenly knows where to find Him. It is in the church, where Christ feeds His flock among the lilies (the saints).

In Chapter 3, which seems similar at first, it is Christ who sovereignly breaks communion with the bride, to test her (Proverbs 17:3), but as she shows her constancy by continuing to seek Him, He returns.

I would get a good, older commentary or look at the sermons on the Song by people like Spurgeon or M'Cheyne. Don't dwell too much on details or you may end up getting too fanciful. Look for Christ (John 5:39).

There is one good modern commentary which I can recommend. It is He is altogether Lovely: Discovering Christ in the Song of Solomon by Roger Ellsworth (ISBN 0-85234-406-6).

While I can understand how the Song relates to God and His bride, true Israel, which today is the Church; I find that interpretation hard to believe as the only right interpretation. I have read that culturally this Song was sung at weddings. Also being a work of Solomon, a son of David, I see no reason to exclude an interpretation that includes the scope of human marriage for the culture of the time.

I guess my issue is what are the reasons you would discount the Song being about human marriage on at least one level? I have yet to hear any good reasons to exclude the Song from being about marriage, and I have yet to hear any good reasons to discount the Song as being allegorical on at least some level.

 

[JonShaff]

I guess my issue is what are the reasons you would discount the Song being about human marriage on at least one level? I have yet to hear any good reasons to exclude the Song from being about marriage, and I have yet to hear any good reasons to discount the Song as being allegorical on at least some level.

It is my opinion, and I agree with Clowny, that if we look at OT books without a NT Lens, we are missing the point of the Author's intent.

 

[Steven Yeadon]

It is my opinion, and I agree with Clowny, that if we look at OT books without a NT Lens, we are missing point of the Author's intent.

I guess I fail to see how this applies in this case. Today, it would seem the Song is about both Christian marriage and, for lack of a better term I know of, a Divine Marriage between Christ and the Church. We may even say it applies to the marriage of God with Israel, the holy people, that today is found in the Church. I just fail to see how allowing the Song to apply to both Christian marriage and Christ's marriage to His Church is reading from an OT lens.

 

[tyndale1946]

bI find it impossible to believe that the Song of Solomon is a sort of ancient Hebrew soft porn.
I believe that we have to look at the Song with spiritual eyes and see the mutual love of Christ and His Church, just as we see in Psalm 45. When John Gill became Pastor of the Baptist Church at Horse Lie Down (Horsley Down) in London in 1720, Unitarianism was rampant in England. Gill believed that the Song was one of the best texts for showing the Deity of Christ, so he spent a few years preaching through it.

A Jewish commentator wrote that the Song resembled a treasure chest to which the key had been locked. I believe that the key is Christ. He is the Beloved and the bride or Shulamite is the Church or the individual believer.

I have only ever preached one sermon on the Song. It was on 5:2-6:3, which I take to be one section. I don't have my sermon notes to hand but, very briefly, it went something like this. The bride, through spiritual slothfulness, loses communion with Christ for a season. She goes about to seek Him, but cannot find Him. She speaks to her church leaders (the watchmen), who point out her sin to her and strip her of her excuses (taking away the veil). She tells her friends about her loss, but they don't understand and ask her why she is so bothered. She then tells them why Christ is so special to her, and as she tells them, she suddenly knows where to find Him. It is in the church, where Christ feeds His flock among the lilies (the saints).

In Chapter 3, which seems similar at first, it is Christ who sovereignly breaks communion with the bride, to test her (Proverbs 17:3), but as she shows her constancy by continuing to seek Him, He returns.

I would get a good, older commentary or look at the sermons on the Song by people like Spurgeon or M'Cheyne. Don't dwell too much on details or you may end up getting too fanciful. Look for Christ (John 5:39).

There is one good modern commentary which I can recommend. It is He is altogether Lovely: Discovering Christ in the Song of Solomon by Roger Ellsworth (ISBN 0-85234-406-6).

Steven... Like Brother Martin I'm also partial to John Gill and I especially like his Commentary on Song Of Solomon... Until you understand that the Song Of Solomon is about Christ and his bride the church... It will be a fleshly, sensual, poetic , non spiritual tale of eroticism... I've heard it said that Jewish men were forbidden to read Song Of Solomon until they were 30... I can understand why!... Brother Glen

 

[Steven Yeadon]

Steven... Like Brother Martin I'm also partial to John Gill and I especially like his Commentary on Song Of Solomon... Until you understand that the Song Of Solomon is about Christ and his bride the church... It will be a fleshly, sensual, poetic , non spiritual tale of eroticism... I've heard it said that Jewish men were forbidden to read Song Of Solomon until they were 30... I can understand why!... Brother Glen

It is my opinion, and I agree with Clowny, that if we look at OT books without a NT Lens, we are missing the point of the Author's intent.

bI find it impossible to believe that the Song of Solomon is a sort of ancient Hebrew soft porn.
I believe that we have to look at the Song with spiritual eyes and see the mutual love of Christ and His Church, just as we see in Psalm 45. When John Gill became Pastor of the Baptist Church at Horse Lie Down (Horsley Down) in London in 1720, Unitarianism was rampant in England. Gill believed that the Song was one of the best texts for showing the Deity of Christ, so he spent a few years preaching through it.

A Jewish commentator wrote that the Song resembled a treasure chest to which the key had been locked. I believe that the key is Christ. He is the Beloved and the bride or Shulamite is the Church or the individual believer.

I have only ever preached one sermon on the Song. It was on 5:2-6:3, which I take to be one section. I don't have my sermon notes to hand but, very briefly, it went something like this. The bride, through spiritual slothfulness, loses communion with Christ for a season. She goes about to seek Him, but cannot find Him. She speaks to her church leaders (the watchmen), who point out her sin to her and strip her of her excuses (taking away the veil). She tells her friends about her loss, but they don't understand and ask her why she is so bothered. She then tells them why Christ is so special to her, and as she tells them, she suddenly knows where to find Him. It is in the church, where Christ feeds His flock among the lilies (the saints).

In Chapter 3, which seems similar at first, it is Christ who sovereignly breaks communion with the bride, to test her (Proverbs 17:3), but as she shows her constancy by continuing to seek Him, He returns.

I would get a good, older commentary or look at the sermons on the Song by people like Spurgeon or M'Cheyne. Don't dwell too much on details or you may end up getting too fanciful. Look for Christ (John 5:39).

There is one good modern commentary which I can recommend. It is He is altogether Lovely: Discovering Christ in the Song of Solomon by Roger Ellsworth (ISBN 0-85234-406-6).

Why it is wrong to have a story of enjoying the creation God gave us? I mean Ecclesiastes is in the bible, why not Song of Songs?

At the end of the day I came to this debate with my mind made up, for once. I believe that my interpretation is basically correct.

 

[JonShaff]

Why it is wrong to have a story of enjoying the creation God gave us? I mean Ecclesiastes is in the bible, why not Song of Songs?

At the end of the day I came to this debate with my mind made up, for once. I believe that my interpretation is basically correct.

Hello brother. I hope all is well. Take a minute and reread my post...I didn't make one statement about the interpretation itself, I simply gave my opinion as to how to look at OT Scripture.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Steven,

According to Ephesians 5, what is marriage suppose to be a picture of? Think about it.

I think perhaps there is a false dichotomy that is being presented, that Song of Solomon cannot both be about romantic and/or erotic love in marriage, while also being an allegory of Christ and his love for the believer. I don't see why it has to be either or.

Personally I see a ton of spiritual lessons in Song of Solomon, I would recommend Hudson Taylor Commentary on the Song, entitled "Union and Communion", Also H.A. Ironside's commentary, and I second the idea of reading Charles Spurgeons sermons on it, I have read several sermons on it by Spurgeon.

Honestly, I think you would have to be spiritually blind not to see the spiritual applications and allegories contained in Song of Solomon.

"CERTAIN DIVINES have doubted the inspiration of Solomon’s Song; others have conceived it to be nothing more than a specimen of ancient love-songs, and some have been afraid to preach from it because of its highly poetical character. The true reason for all this avoidance of one of the most heavenly portions of God’s Word lies in the fact that the spirit of this Song is not easily attained. Its music belongs to the higher spiritual life, and has no charm in it for unspiritual ears. The Song occupies a sacred enclosure into which none may enter unprepared. “Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground,” is the warning voice from its secret tabernacles. The historical books I may compare to the outer courts of the Temple; the Gospels, the Epistles, and the Psalms, bring us into the holy place or the Court of the priests; but the Song of Solomon is the most holy place:the holy of holies, before which the veil still hangs to many an untaught believer. It is not all the saints who can enter here, for they have not yet attained unto the holy confidence of faith, and that exceeding familiarity of love which will permit them to commune in conjugal love with the great Bridegroom. We are told that the Jews d id not permit the young student to read the Canticles—that years of full maturity were thought necessary before the man could rightly profit by this mysterious Song of loves; possibly they were wise, at any rate the prohibition foreshadowed a great truth. The Song is, in truth, a book for full-grown Christians. Babes in grace may find their carnal and sensuous affections stirred up by it towards Jesus, whom they know, rather “after the flesh” than in the spirit; but it needs a man of fuller growth, who has leaned his head upon the bosom of his Master, and been baptized with his baptism, to ascend the lofty mountains of love on which the spouse standeth with her beloved. The Sung, from the first verse to the last, will be clear to those who have received an unction from the holy One, and know all things. (1 John 2:20.) You are aware, dear friends, that there are very few commentaries upon the Epistles of John. Where we find fifty commentaries upon any book of St. Paul, you will hardly find one upon John. Why is that? Is the book too difficult? The words are very simple; there is hardly a word of four syllables anywhere in John’s Epistles. Ah! but they are so saturated through and through with the spirit of love, which also perfumes this Book of Solomon, that those who are not taught in the school of communion, cry out, “We cannot read it, for it is sealed.” The Song is a golden casket, of which love is the key rather than learning. Those who have not attained unto heights of affection, those who have not been educated by familiar intercourse with Jesus, cannot come near to this mine of treasure, “seeing it is hid from the eyes of all living, and kept close from the fowls of heaven.” O for the soaring eagle wing of John, and the far-seeing dove’s eyes of Solomon; but the most of us are blind and cannot see afar off. May God be pleased to make us grow in grace, and give us so much of the Holy Spirit, that with feet like hind’s feet we may stand upon the high places of Scripture, and this morning have some near and dear intercourse with Christ Jesus."

 

[TCassidy]

I think perhaps there is a false dichotomy that is being presented, that Song of Solomon cannot both be about romantic and/or erotic love in marriage, while also being an allegory of Christ and his love for the believer. I don't see why it has to be either or.

Exactly. There is both type and antitype. Without the type the antitype is meaningless, and without the antitype the type is meaningless.

Both are true. The type is a man's love for his wife. The anti-type is Christ's love for His church.

 

[Steven Yeadon]

Steven,

According to Ephesians 5, what is marriage suppose to be a picture of? Think about it.

I think perhaps there is a false dichotomy that is being presented, that Song of Solomon cannot both be about romantic and/or erotic love in marriage, while also being an allegory of Christ and his love for the believer. I don't see why it has to be either or.

Personally I see a ton of spiritual lessons in Song of Solomon, I would recommend Hudson Taylor Commentary on the Song, entitled "Union and Communion", Also H.A. Ironside's commentary, and I second the idea of reading Charles Spurgeons sermons on it, I have read several sermons on it by Spurgeon.

Honestly, I think you would have to be spiritually blind not to see the spiritual applications and allegories contained in Song of Solomon.

"CERTAIN DIVINES have doubted the inspiration of Solomon’s Song; others have conceived it to be nothing more than a specimen of ancient love-songs, and some have been afraid to preach from it because of its highly poetical character. The true reason for all this avoidance of one of the most heavenly portions of God’s Word lies in the fact that the spirit of this Song is not easily attained. Its music belongs to the higher spiritual life, and has no charm in it for unspiritual ears. The Song occupies a sacred enclosure into which none may enter unprepared. “Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground,” is the warning voice from its secret tabernacles. The historical books I may compare to the outer courts of the Temple; the Gospels, the Epistles, and the Psalms, bring us into the holy place or the Court of the priests; but the Song of Solomon is the most holy place:the holy of holies, before which the veil still hangs to many an untaught believer. It is not all the saints who can enter here, for they have not yet attained unto the holy confidence of faith, and that exceeding familiarity of love which will permit them to commune in conjugal love with the great Bridegroom. We are told that the Jews d id not permit the young student to read the Canticles—that years of full maturity were thought necessary before the man could rightly profit by this mysterious Song of loves; possibly they were wise, at any rate the prohibition foreshadowed a great truth. The Song is, in truth, a book for full-grown Christians. Babes in grace may find their carnal and sensuous affections stirred up by it towards Jesus, whom they know, rather “after the flesh” than in the spirit; but it needs a man of fuller growth, who has leaned his head upon the bosom of his Master, and been baptized with his baptism, to ascend the lofty mountains of love on which the spouse standeth with her beloved. The Sung, from the first verse to the last, will be clear to those who have received an unction from the holy One, and know all things. (1 John 2:20.) You are aware, dear friends, that there are very few commentaries upon the Epistles of John. Where we find fifty commentaries upon any book of St. Paul, you will hardly find one upon John. Why is that? Is the book too difficult? The words are very simple; there is hardly a word of four syllables anywhere in John’s Epistles. Ah! but they are so saturated through and through with the spirit of love, which also perfumes this Book of Solomon, that those who are not taught in the school of communion, cry out, “We cannot read it, for it is sealed.” The Song is a golden casket, of which love is the key rather than learning. Those who have not attained unto heights of affection, those who have not been educated by familiar intercourse with Jesus, cannot come near to this mine of treasure, “seeing it is hid from the eyes of all living, and kept close from the fowls of heaven.” O for the soaring eagle wing of John, and the far-seeing dove’s eyes of Solomon; but the most of us are blind and cannot see afar off. May God be pleased to make us grow in grace, and give us so much of the Holy Spirit, that with feet like hind’s feet we may stand upon the high places of Scripture, and this morning have some near and dear intercourse with Christ Jesus."

If you read carefully I actually argue that both interpretations of Song of Solomon are true. The issue I have is that historically there has been a lot of opposition to a human marriage reading of the Song. Something that drives me up the wall. However, I do see that Christ and His Church must be represented as an interpretation of the Song if it is about marriage.