Almost without exception, preachers promote the idea that the Song of Solomon is loaded with sexually erotic symbolism and allegory that extols the joys of monogamous marriage. If this be true then it is completely out of step with the overall revelation of God's story of redemption!
The story goes, according to some preachers, that Solomon sees a girl, falls in love, takes her, has his way with her and she is entirely complicit with this erotic liaison. The language of the Song of Solmon, these preachers argue, is allegorical so as to show some decorum about what is usually not often talked about: the act of sex between a husband and his bride. I would like to debunk this myth and propose a different story that not only fits perfectly with the text but also the overall message of Scripture...[more]
Interesting. Is this a reaction to Mark Driscoll's teaching on the subject?
ReplyDeleteYou may be right. I have never been comfortable identifying Solomon as the lover. However, if you are right, I think some of your analysis may need tweaking. The identification of 6:4-12 fits the bucolic lover better than it does Solomon "trying yet again to seduce his reluctant "bride"..." The agricultural similes and metaphors used by the speaker of the Shulammite would sound more natural coming from the lover than from the city dwelling Solomon. Moreover, he does not just praise her among the other queens and concubines, but says that she is "the only one" - which in the case of the lover is simply literally true - she IS his only betrothed. In the light of your comments on 8:1-3, probably 4:1-16 ought also to be ascribed to the lover, not Solomon, since he calls her sister. In no sense could she have been 'sister' to Solomon, yet, as you point out, she grew up in the vilage with her lover as though they were brother and sister.
Is it coincidental that Dave Bish has just blogged today on the same subject? (http://thebluefish.org/2008/09/which-way-to-go-with-song-of-songs.html)