If I were to come across a booklet in a library containing just the Song of Solomon, I’d probably conclude that it belonged on the romantic fiction shelves; it’s a beautiful love-story.
But instead I find it placed by God right in the middle of 38 Christ-centred books, a context that indicates what it’s all about.
Let me put it this way. Imagine you picked up a book that was entitled “The Coming King of Love.” There are lots of stories in it telling about how some rather unlovely and unloveable people needed such a king, longed for such a king, and even predicted such a king. From time to time the King sent special messages and visions to some of these hopeful people, which they also recorded in this book, together with the King’s laws. Other chapters detail certain rituals and festivals that kept the hope alive and also further defined it. There are also some beautiful songs for the people to sing as they wait for the King’s coming. And then in the middle of the book you find a poem that celebrates the love of the King for a rather undeserving woman. It’s a beautiful literary tale of romantic and even passionate love.
What’s your reaction?
Do you think, “Oh, this seems out of place,” or “Oh, this must be some marriage guidance for me?”
Of course not. Why would the King write a whole book about Himself and then throw in a few chapters that had nothing whatsoever to do with Him? As Christ Himself said, He is to be found in ALL the Scriptures (Luke 24:27; 44-48),
I’m afraid that the reason why some simply see the Song of Solomon as mere marriage guidance counseling is because they do not believe that the rest of the Old Testament is about the coming King of Love.
That’s not to say that the Song has nothing to say about human marriage. Of course it does, but in a secondary way. That’s how Paul also uses the marriage between the Lord and His Church, as a guide and picture of the marriage between a man and a woman (Eph. 5:22ff; cf Ps. 45). And as Paul also teaches, it works the opposite way too.
This argument has Old Testament precedent on its side. The Old Testament covenant with Israel was pictured as a marriage, and idolatry was equated with adultery (Ex. 34:10-17), a theme also taken up by the prophets (Isa. 51:1-17; 54:6; 61:10; 62:4-5; Jer. 2:1-3; 31:32; Mal. 2:14), and carried on into the New Testament (Jn. 3:29; 2 Cor. 11:2; Matt. 9:15; Luke. 5:35; Rev. 19:7; 21:9; 22:17. In fact, throughout the Bible, monogamous marriage is the norm for depicting the covenant relationship between God and His people, with it all climaxing at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev. 21-22).
So, if we are to read this book as a call to a romantic passionate relationship with the Lord, the King of Love, how do we interpret the details of the text? My answer may surprise you. “We don’t!” In fact I’m afraid that it’s because so many Western interpreters have got so lost in analyzing the minute details of every pomegranate and every tree that many have been turned off reading the Song in a Christ-centered way (and this analytical Western approach is also why so many have so tragically turned the Song into a sexual gymnastics manual).
Next week I’ll come back to this and give some hints as to how we can read the text with sensitive Eastern hearts rather than with analytical Western minds.
Yes! Finally an interpretation which connects with my own heart! I ‘see’ Him, our Lord, wooing and beckoning me to climb up into His richly-adorned couch and gaze with Him into the glorious future He is bringing about for me…and the Church, His Bride.
Thank you for your inspirational insight. I look forward to reading more.
Thanks Naomi. I hope I can live up to your expectation!
Thank you for your thoughts, David, especially considering the recent influx of pornographic interpretations of the Song of Solomon. However, isn’t the allegorical reading of Scripture the very thing that leads so many into misinterpretation? Perhaps that is not what you are calling for, if not, can you please explain the difference? Explain how the writing of Solomon seems to mean a very literal couple in the plain sense, but how that is only a secondary aspect of the text?
Philip, thanks for your question. Hopefully further posts on the subject will help distinguish this approach from the allegorical.
I agree that the story describes a literal couple. As such, there are lessons for human relationships. However, the Christ-centered context of the Song (and the similar use of the husband/wife relationship to characterize the believer’s relationship to the Lord) calls us to look, think, and feel higher.
Professor Murray, I have come across your site in recent times and would like to express my appreciation to you for its instructive and edifying comment.
I look forward to this series of posts which I suspect will go some way to counteract some erroneous views that have arisen concerning the Song of Songs in recent times.
Thanks Ian. I hope I can be of some help in this debate.
Hello Dr. Murray,
I appreciate your sermons and writings on the Song of Songs. I spent several months meditating on the Song in Christ-centered manner and found it very beneficial to my soul. Your words on the Song helped confirm my meditations. Also, I remember in one of your sermons, you mentioned that, concerning our genuine experiences of communion with the triune God, the enemy will whisper into our ears ‘you’re making it up.’ That word alone greatly helped me in a time of doubting. Thank you!
Question for you: do you think the loss of a Christ-centered hermeneutic of the Song has contributed to the current de-emphasis on communion with God in evangelical circles (including Reformed)? This breaks my heart because communion with God is the most precious benefit of the Christian life!
Thoughts?
Thanks for your encouraging remarks, Jonathan. Yes, I’m also disturbed by the modern suspicion of “the life of God in the soul of man” as Scougal would put it.