The Song of Songs
“The Song of Songs, which is Solomon's. May he kiss me with the kisses of his mouth! For your love is better than wine.” One does not have to get far into this obscure little book, “The Song of Solomon,” before one gets the idea that this is no ordinary biblical book. 2.14 - “Oh my dove, in the clefts of the rock, In the secret place of the steep pathway, Let me see your form, Let me hear your voice; For your voice is sweet, and your form is lovely.” 4.1 - “How beautiful you are, my darling, How beautiful you are! Your eyes are like doves behind your veil; Your hair is lock a flock of goats that have descended from Mount Gilead.” 5,10 - “My beloved is dazzling and ruddy, Outstanding among ten thousand. His head is like gold, pure gold; His locks are like clusters of dates and black as a raven.” And on and on it goes.
What are we to make of this strange, strange book so different from any other book in the Bible. The name of God is never mentioned in the Song of Solomon. It is never referred to by New Testament writers. It seems to be mainly concerned with Solomon and some woman that he is in love with. It is poetical. It is written in the form and expressing the values of Ancient Near East cultures, which is very distant culturally from our own. What possible purpose could Solomon have for writing the book in the first place, and why is it in the canon of Scripture?
I want to introduce this great, beautiful book to you this evening. I will do that mainly by investigating three main ways of interpreting this book. I will weigh in on what my opinion of how this book should be interpreted, and then I will finish by asking the question, “Why is it important how we interpret this book?” The church of Jesus Christ in America, at least, and in most of the West, I would argue, has lost something, and it is my belief that if we recover the Song of Solomon, if we understand it as it was meant to be understood, that we will begin to recover what we have lost.
Historically, this little book was not nearly as neglected as it is today. Verses from within it were memorized and quoted and written down. Of all the Old Testament books, in the course of history, no book as had more commentaries written about it than this little book. It was a treasure of comfort to Christians in difficulty, but somehow we have come to neglect it. There has been some renaissance lately of interest in this book, which one might think would be a good thing, but I am going to argue the opposite. We have renewed interest in this book for what I believe are all the wrong reasons. I am very concerned about this, I do not take that fact lightly, and this is why I take up the subject.
I said there were three main interpretations of this book. The first interpretation is what is known as the allegorical interpretation. James Durham, in his excellent commentary on the book, which I highly recommend, by the way, explains what is meant by interpreting the Song allegorically. He writes: “This song is not to be taken literally, that is, as the words do at first sound; but it is to be taken spiritually, figuratively, and allegorically, as having some spiritual meaning.”
Now, what does he mean by that. He means that, while written in the form of a love poem between Solomon and an unnamed Shulammite bride, it is not to be taken that way. Durham again: “The divine mystery intended, and set forth here, is the mutual love and spiritual communion that is betwixt Christ and the Church.” So what the Song intends, and the way we are to interpret it, is that it is written in a love poem, but what is to be understood is not love between Solomon and his bride, but Solomon is representative of Christ, and the woman is representative of the Church, or if we want to take it even more personally, of the individual believer. So it works out the love Christ has for the church, and the love the church, his bride has for Christ.
Probably the best known allegory that most of us are familiar with is the book series, “The Chronicles of Narnia,” written by C. S. Lewis, which is an allegory. Aslan the lion represents Christ, and the White witch represents Satan, and the four kids represent all humans, etc. etc. etc. So it is not a “neat” story, a neat fantasy story, but it is meant to convey truth in an unusual way, which it certainly does. We know this is an allegory because C. S. Lewis told us it was.
One strength of this interpretation is that , historically, the allegorical interpretation of the Song, was the accepted interpretation. The church is virtually unanimous, or almost so, up until the 19th century in accepting the allegorical interpretation as the correct understanding of the Song. John Owen, the famous puritan theologian accepted this interpretation. Jonathan Edwards understood the Song this way, as did Charles Spurgeon, John Newton, John Gill, Matthew Henry, and we could go on and on and on. My point is that some good strong men and women of faith have held to the allegorical understanding of the Song.
Another strength of this interpretation is that it attempts to be faithful to Christ's words in John 5.39 - “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me.” So we go back to the Song and say, does this Song speak of Christ? How does it? The allegorical interpretation answers that question.
The allegorical interpretation has generally fallen out of favor with theologians today. Its greatest weakness is that it cannot come to some consensus on what all the imagery in the Song means. Here is one commentators thoughts: “Church interpretation, in spite of 2000 years labour, has yet brought to light no sure results, but only numberless absurdities, especially where the Song describes the lovers according to their members from head to foot and from foot to head.”
James Durham, bless his heart, in his commentary, has to bend over backwards to explains some of the imagery in the Song. For instance, 6.8, “There are 60 queens and 80 concubines, and maidens without number, but my Dove, my perfect one is unique.”
He writes: By queens, concubines, and virgins then, we understand believers of different growths and degrees. Now, I am sorry, but that stretches things too far for me, I do not see it that way, and I don't think many others would either.
I do not hold to the allegorical view of the Song, although, as we shall see, I do not think they are far off of the truth.
The second interpretation is what I call the, “What You See Is What You Get,” interpretation. That is, it is an oriental love poem because it is meant to be an oriental love poem. It is Solomon pouring out his love for this Shulammite woman, and in doing so, his purpose is to describe for us, a holy, pure, love for his bride to be. That God intended this book to be, the marriage manual to end all marriage manuals.
One well known preacher captures this understanding as to the Song's purpose quite well. “The Song of Solomon is preemintently the cry of the body in its essential yearning. And what is the essential yearning of the body? For love. Therefore the theme of this book is love…It is a revelation of all that was intended in the divinely given function that we call sex. It is sex as God intended sex to be, involving not just a physical activity, but the whole nature of the man.
Another writer put it this way, it is a “vision of love and friendship, passion and respect, sexual and emotional intimacy - in one fulfilling relationship.”
There are certain strengths to this interpretation. One is that it makes the book easy to interpret. It is all about love and relationships. Who can argue that believers what with all the garbage in the culture need to be exposed to a pure, vital love relationship and what that looks like.
This interpretation is the one that theologians and pastors generally hold to these days. While researching this sermon I would say that this view is held by 80 to 90% of pastors and theologians, at least of the ones whom I read.
I do not hold this view. I reject it, and I reject it quite strongly for several reasons. I think it is important to lay out clearly why I reject this view because I think it has such strong consequences for the church at large.
First, I reject this view because to hold it you have to say that Solomon uses the obvious to explain the obvious. What I mean by that is that Solomon had no deeper meaning when he was writing this great love poem, than the love of a man for a woman. Now I am not saying that that is not an important object of a poem. It certainly is. What I am saying is that, to hold this view, you have to say, here we have the wisest person that has ever lived in the history of the world. God specially grants Solomon wisdom. 1 Kings 3.12, “Behold, I have given you a wise and discerning heart, so that there has been no one like you before you, nor shall one like you arise after you.” Now stop and ponder the import of those words. In terms of wisdom, no person will ever be wiser than Solomon. Ever. So to hold the “marriage manual” view of the Song, you have to say that the greatest Song ever written, by the wisest man who ever lived, has no deeper meaning than the plain, obvious meaning of the words.
No one writes poetry like that. When you write poetry, you do not use the obvious to explain the obvious. You write so that it makes people think, slows them down, and gets them to say, “what is going on here.” It gets them to stop and reflect. The beauty of Proverbs is that, the longer you linger over each individual proverb, the deeper you see the meaning of the proverb.
I am not, by nature, a very reflective person. Reflective people do not make good Marines. When your Commanding Officer tells you to do a frontal assault on a heavily fortified enemy position, because that is what the situation requires, it does not pay for you to be very reflective. You just have to do what is required and hope for the best.
I had an English class in college where we were reading the poems of Robert Frost. We were discussing this one poem, the title of which escapes me, which talked about normal rural New England themes, for which Robert Frost is so well-known. So we get to class and the professor says, “what is the meaning of this poem.” I, being quite impatient and unreflective, launched into a tirade about the meaning is what it says it is, it is about apples and fences and orchards. Why can't we just interpret it as it is written. My wise old English teacher responded, “Because Robert Frost does not allow you to interpret it that way.” You know what. He was absolutely correct. There was one little line in that poem of probably 40 lines, that forced you to stop and say, Robert Frost is not just talking about apples and orchards and fences. He wants us, forces us, to see something deeper. That is the nature of poetry.
So I cannot bring myself to believe that Solomon, who was far wiser and smarter than Robert Frost, would write his greatest poem and mean nothing more than what we initially think him to mean.
Second, I reject the “marriage manual” interpetation of the Song because it does nothing to engage Christ's words in John 5.39, which we have already quoted, and in Luke 24. 25-27. Christ is walking with the disciples on the way to Emmaus after his resurrection, and when he reveals himself, he says, “Oh foolish men and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into his glory? Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning himself in all the Scriptures.”
Boy I would have liked to been there for that lecture.
At any rate, I cannot imagine, Christ getting to this great, incredible beautiful song, and saying, “Oh, that? That is about marriage, nothing in there about me.” I just cannot imagine that.
Third, I reject the “marriage manual” interpretation because it does not compare Scripture with Scripture.
Turn to Isaiah 5.1. “Let me sing now for my well-beloved. A song of my beloved concerning His vineyard. My well-beloved had a vineyard on a fertile hill.” That word “beloved” there, in the context refers to the Lord of Hosts (c.f. vs. 7). The word “beloved” is used 33 times in the Old Testament, by my count. 26 of those times it is found in the Song of Solomon and it is always used when the woman is referring to Solomon. He is her “beloved. Every other time it is used in the Old Testament it is referring to the love between God and Israel, between God and his people. So to hold to the “marriage manual” interpretation of the Song, I must say that Solomon uses the word in a different manner than every other writer that uses it in the Old Testament. Surely that is a hint to us as to how we should understand the Song.
There is a remarkably close connection between Ps. 45 and the Song of Solomon. There is a “King” who is glorious and praised, and he is going to a wedding ceremony. There is a King's daughter who is “all glorious within,” and she will be the King's bride. There are the brides' companions - the virgins - who keep the bride company. In the Song of Solomon there is the King - Solomon; there is the bride that he is pursuring, the Shulammite; there is those ladies who surround her the “daughers of Jerusalem.” The difference is that in Ps 45 we absolutely know that the passage refers to Christ because Hebrews 1 quotes from Ps 45 and says it applies to Christ. One commentator wrote:
“it would not be an overstatement to say that this psalm is the key to unlocking the meaning of the Song.” I agree with that assessment.
Song 5.16 - His mouth is full of sweetness, Ps 45. 2 - “Grace is poured upon your lips.” Song 1.2 - “Your oils have a pleasing fragrance, Your name is like purified oil.” Ps 45.8 - “All of your garments are fragrant with myrrh and aloes and cassia. We could go on, but when you read Ps 45 and you read the Song of Songs, one cannot help but be struck by the similarities between the two. And Ps 45 is a love relationship between Christ and His bride, that is the church!
Finally, I get very skeptical when the American church, which is so closely tied to the culture, so little different from a culture that is obsessed with sex from head to toe and from top to bottom, comes to a book of Scripture and cannot see beyond the sexual references. Isn't that what one would expect of a church within a sexualized culture?
Surely Solomon could have done better than that, couldn't he? Surely he meant something beyond that, there is a truth which is grander, more timeless, more important than just marital love, as grand as that subject is.
Let me sound a not of caution here. I am not saying that we do not take application out of the Song and apply it to marriage. We certainly do. That is exactly what Paul does in Eph 5. We are instructed to love our wives, “as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” Of course there is application there for us in regards to love and marriage. My argument is that this is not the primary, nor the most important use of the Song.
Well, I have run out of time and have done nothing but tell you how NOT to interpret this book. I will set my understanding of it before you next time.
I want to tonight discussing why this is an important issue. Who cares how you take the Song, if you are orthodox and hold to Scripture. What does it matter who is right? This is a good and important question.
The church of God lacks something. We have our theology mostly correct. We pay attention to worship, praise, adoration of God. We do the good and faithful work which God calls us to do, help the poor and sick. The forms of our faith appear to be good, in good shape. But we are missing something. If one goes back and reads the believing theologians and preachers of the past, one is immediately struck that they experienced Christ in a way that we do not experience Him. The way that they speak and write of Christ is in a sense almost foreign to our experience.
I will synthesize it in this way. They treasured Christ. They had a deep, vital, intimate relationship with Christ which permeated everything they did and said and how they ministered. I think no one understood this better than Jonathan Edwards. Here is his testimony:
FROM about that time, I began to have a new kind of apprehensions and ideas of Christ, and the work of redemption, and the glorious way of salvation by him. An inward, sweet sense of these things, at times, came into my heart; and my soul was led away in pleasant views and contemplations of them. And my mind was greatly engaged to spend my time in reading and meditating on Christ, on the beauty and excellency of his person, and the lovely way of salvation by free grace in him. I found no books so delightful to me, as those that treated of these subjects. Those words Cant. ii. 1. used to be abundantly with me, "I am the Rose of Sharon, and the Lily of the valleys." The words seemed to me sweetly to represent the loveliness and beauty of Jesus Christ. The whole book of Canticles used to be pleasant to me, and I used to be much in reading it, about that time; and found, from time to time, an inward sweetness, that would carry me away, in my contemplations.
If we are to recover this sense of the beauty of Christ, if we are to treasure Him with all of our being, if we are run hard after him. We must reclaim the Song of Songs. This will give new, vital meaning to “My beloved is mine, and I am his.”
Song of Solomon
I. Introduction - “The Song of Songs, which is Solomon's. May he kiss me with the kisses of his mouth! For your love is better than wine.”
. 2.14 - “Oh my dove, in the clefts of the rock, In the secret place of the steep pathway, Let me see your form, Let me hear your voice; For your voice is sweet, and your form is lovely.” 4.1 - “How beautiful you are, my darling, How beautiful you are! Your eyes are like doves behind your veil; Your hair is lock a flock of goats that have descended from Mount Gilead.” 5,10 - “My beloved is dazzling and ruddy, Outstanding among ten thousand. His head is like gold, pure gold; His locks are like clusters of dates and black as a raven.
A. What are we to make?
B. 3 ways of interpreting book - Fundamentally different from the start.
Q. Why is it important?
C. Historically not neglected
D. Church missing something…
II. Allegorical Understanding
A. Every jot and tittle allegory, really means something else.
B. James Durham - “This song is not to be taken literally, that is, as the words do at first sound; but it is to be taken spiritually, figuratively, and allegorically, as having some spiritual meaning.”
C. What does he mean? - “The divine mystery intended, and set forth here, is the mutual love and spiritual communion that is betwixt Christ and the Church.”
D. Allegory Example - The Chronicles of Narnia or Pilgrim's Progress
E. Assessment
1. Strength - a. Historical interpretation of the church
b. John 5.39 “You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me.
2. Weakness - No consensus on imagery - “Church interpretation, in spite of 2000 years labour, has yet brought to light no sure results, but only numberless absurdities, especially where the Song describes the lovers according to their members from head to foot and from foot to head.”
a. James Durham - , 6.8, “There are 60 queens and 80 concubines, and maidens without number, but my Dove, my perfect one is unique.”
He writes: By queens, concubines, and virgins then, we understand believers of different growths and degrees.
III. Marriage Manual Interpretation
A. WYSIWYG
Stedman - “The Song of Solomon is preemintently the cry of the body in its essential yearning. And what is the essential yearning of the body? For love. Therefore the theme of this book is love…It is a revelation of all that was intended in the divinely given function that we call sex. It is sex as God intended sex to be, involving not just a physical activity, but the whole nature of the man.
Glickman - “vision of love and friendship, passion and respect, sexual and emotional intimacy - in one fulfilling relationship.”
1. Strengths - a. Easy to interpret, but doesn't remove difficulties
b. Good to see what how true love works itself out
2. Weaknesses
a. Uses obvious to explain obvious
. 1 Kings 3.12, “Behold, I have given you a wise and discerning heart, so that there has been no one like you before you, nor shall one like you arise after you.”
2. Purpose of Poetry
Illustration: English Lit class in college
b. Does nothing to engage Christ's word - John 5.39; Luke 24.25-27 - “Oh foolish men and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into his glory? Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning himself in all the Scriptures.”
c. No comparing Scripture with Scripture
1. Isaiah 5.1 - “Let me sing now for my well-beloved. A song of my beloved concerning His vineyard. My well-beloved had a vineyard on a fertile hill.” 33 times, 26 in Song of Songs
2 .Ps 45 - Close connection
3. Examples - Song 5.16 - His mouth is full of sweetness, Ps 45. 2 - “Grace is poured upon your lips.” Song 1.2 - “Your oils have a pleasing fragrance, Your name is like purified oil.” Ps 45.8 - “All of your garments are fragrant with myrrh and aloes and cassia.
4. Church in a sensual culture
d. Caution - Application to love and marriage! Paul in Ephesians 5 - Husband love your wives.
IV. Why is this important?
A. We lack something - Treasuring Christ, a love relationship with Christ that involves the affections.
Jonathan Edwards - FROM about that time, I began to have a new kind of apprehensions and ideas of Christ, and the work of redemption, and the glorious way of salvation by him. An inward, sweet sense of these things, at times, came into my heart; and my soul was led away in pleasant views and contemplations of them. And my mind was greatly engaged to spend my time in reading and meditating on Christ, on the beauty and excellency of his person, and the lovely way of salvation by free grace in him. I found no books so delightful to me, as those that treated of these subjects. Those words Cant. ii. 1. used to be abundantly with me, "I am the Rose of Sharon, and the Lily of the valleys." The words seemed to me sweetly to represent the loveliness and beauty of Jesus Christ. The whole book of Canticles used to be pleasant to me, and I used to be much in reading it, about that time; and found, from time to time, an inward sweetness, that would carry me away, in my contemplations.
“I am my beloved's and He is mine.
8