non-ifb Song of solomon discussion

[dwayner79]

Since the taboo topic I cannot respond to, I wanted to ask the question here...

Actually, it does not. The Song Of Solomon is an exact parallel of our Spiritual walk with the Lord. They are not even married in the book, but she is awaiting his return to take her home as his bride at the end of ot- much like the church is awaiting Christ's return. Any sex would be out of place (would be fornication), and also it would make that book pornography/erotica.

Various solid commentators of the past have shown that this book deals with our fellowship and relationship with the Lord using the picture of fellowship between an espoused (which means "engaged", not married - see chapter 3) couple. Some of these commentators are: Spurgeon, Matthew Henry, Hudson Taylor.

This is an interesting view, simply because I do not think Song of Solomon could be any clearer on what it is discussing. It is a highly sexual book.

I think you are forcing the bible to conform to our culture where "pornography/erotica" are so disturbingly used, and therefore we swing to the other side of the pendulum, rejecting all things sexual as dirty or sinful. Scripture is scripture, and it includes a frank discussion on celebrating marriage, with the challenge to not awaken love until its time. That is the book of Song of Solomon. To pass that off as not sexual in nature seems a hermeneutic injustice.

[trc123]

Since the taboo topic I cannot respond to, I wanted to ask the question here...



This is an interesting view, simply because I do not think Song of Solomon could be any clearer on what it is discussing. It is a highly sexual book.

I think you are forcing the bible to conform to our culture where "pornography/erotica" are so disturbingly used, and therefore we swing to the other side of the pendulum, rejecting all things sexual as dirty or sinful. Scripture is scripture, and it includes a frank discussion on celebrating marriage, with the challenge to not awaken love until its time. That is the book of Song of Solomon. To pass that off as not sexual in nature seems a hermeneutic injustice.

You have said exactly what I wanted to say, but I chose not to say it because I knew it would fall on deaf ears and would be akin to "spitting into the wind."

[dwayner79]

I should also clarify that while SoS depicts certain sex acts, it does so through the veil of poetry. It purposefully is not explicit in its descriptions, so as to not be "pornographic" (if that is even the right word). In our discussions of sex in mixed company, the same veil should be used. So my response to the taboo topic would be that outside of marriage, the same veil should be used. There is no reason to turn SoS into a how to for married folks. That is just as bad of a hermeneutic injustice as rejecting its depictions of sex altogether.

[trc123]

I should also clarify that while SoS depicts certain sex acts, it does so through the veil of poetry. It purposefully is not explicit in its descriptions, so as to not be "pornographic" (if that is even the right word). In our discussions of sex in mixed company, the same veil should be used. So my response to the taboo topic would be that outside of marriage, the same veil should be used. There is no reason to turn SoS into a how to for married folks. That is just as bad of a hermeneutic injustice as rejecting its depictions of sex altogether.

Well put........

[kevinmiller]

I agree Dwayne.

[Jerry]

When did the two main characters get married, if it is supposedly describing their married life?

Chapter three refers to the day of Solomon's espousal, which means "engagement." No matter your view on how much sex talk is appropriate, if the characters are not married, then the book would be promoting fornication, which we know the Bible forbids.

Song of Solomon 3:11 Go forth, O ye daughters of Zion, and behold king Solomon with the crown wherewith his mother crowned him in the day of his espousals, and in the day of the gladness of his heart.

Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Please show us the references within the Song itself that teach the couple is already married.

Also, curious what Bible references/parallels can you give to each part of the Song of Solomon to show that God's intended meaning is to refer to sex? Psalm 45 is a good start, as it uses some of the same imagery, but no sex in Psalm 45.

If it is teaching sex, then perhaps that is one part of the Bible that a child should not be reading - and perhaps young Timothy only knew the rest of the Scriptures as a child (2 Timothy 3:15).

Would you throw out the works of various sound commentators (such as Spurgeon, Henry, Hudson Taylor, and others that trace the symbolism through Scripture and shows how it relates to our daily spiritual walk and fellowship with the Lord?

[Psalms18_28]

Luk 2:5 To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. <----- thought I would throw in a verse on espoused

[dwayner79]

When did the two main characters get married

Somewhere between chapter 3 and chapter 4 where he undresses her and calls her his bride. Its a song. It follows them from engagement, to marriage. That seems pretty clear that they are engaged in the beginning, and chapter 4 and 5 are the wedding night descriptions.

As far as children not being taught about sex, that is a purely cultural reaction. There is nothing sinful about sex in marriage, and there is nothing sinful with children being taught a proper view of that union (OBviously veiled in generalities). Again, our culture has so dirtied sex that we think it is all evil. It is not.

I have company over for the holidays. Not sure how much I can check back in. Happy turkeyday all.

[Bakershalfdozen]

I agree with dwayner also. SofS is indeed poetry about love and marriage. It can be applied to our relationship with Christ but the primary interpretation of the book is love and marriage.

[Psalms18_28]

I agree with Bakers

[Jerry]

I am not saying it is wrong to teach children about sex in an appropriate environment - but if the Song of Solomon is about sex, then it would be inappropriate for children to read, unlike the rest of the Bible. Sure, there are other parts they would not understand yet - but no other parts we would refuse them from reading. I would have serious prOBlems with my 6 or 7 year old (for example, if I had one) reading about sex within a marriage when they are not yet old enough to even understand that aspect of marriage.

[Jerry]

For the sake of discussing this position as set forth in this thread, let's take chapter five for example - a chapter I believe is describing the believer backsliding and not letting Christ in to fellowship, then she goes out to find Him, but can't at first - until she witnesses to others, gets her heart stirred up by focussing on the Lord again, which causes the daughters of Jerusalem to desire to seek Him with her - then in the next chapter she finds Him where she knew He was before but had forgotten. I can give Biblical passages to back up this viewpoint and have done so in this study: Is Your Armour On? The physical descriptions do not cause a conflict with this view, as tracing the descriptions throughout Scripture shows many places where they are presented without sex being the context - both Hudson Taylor and Matthew Henry do a good jOB of analyzing these portions.

Without getting graphic or inappropriate in what is posted, please show where sex is being discussed/presented (however you want to call it) and what related passages lead you to that conclusion? The Scriptures are not of any private interpretation so there has to be other passages we can go to to have either view reinforced Biblically.

I know we don't see eye to eye here, and I think your position is wrong (hence the debate) - but I don't think that makes someone evil or a compromiser because of it - but I do want to see how you believe this position is reinforced by the rest of the Bible.

[JerryNumbers]

Gaebelein's Annoted Bible

The Song of Solomon, as this book is called in the King James Version, is the third book of which Solomon is the author, preceded by Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. In the Hebrew Bible it occupies a different place. It is found there in the section called "Kethubim," the Hagiographic division. It belongs to the so-called "Megilloth" or rolls and is placed first among them--Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes and Esther. In the synagogual service it has been appointed to be read on the eighth day of Passover, the feast of redemption. This is suggestive, for, as we shall see, this Song is a love-song, expressing the love of Messiah for His people.

A better title for this book is "the Song of Songs." It corresponds to the Hebrew beginning of the book in Hebrew--Shir Ha-shirim. It is called "Song of Songs" in the Septuagint (Asma Asmaton) and also in the Vulgate (Canticum Canticorum). This title expresses most fully the spiritual meaning of this little book.

Needless to say that this beautiful Song has suffered much from the hands of the men who claim to be critics of the Word of God. We do not care to repeat the charges which have been made against this Song as being sensuous, if not immoral, in its suggestions. Such is the verdict of the natural man, who, by such criticism, reveals the state of his own heart.

Sex is dirty, or should I say sin, unless its between one husband and his one wife. There be many who want to bring sex out from between the one husband and his one wife, but they've always been around.

[trc123]

It tells me much when one says first that "sex is dirty, or should I say sin" and then finally proceeds to say "unless its between one husband and his one wife."

Perhaps others would have said, " Sex is beautiful and wonderful between a husband and wife, in fact a picture of the wonderful intimacy one has with their beloved; it is only dirty outside the confines that God has established, outside the marriage bed."

[Wilchbla]

Since the taboo topic I cannot respond to, I wanted to ask the question here...



This is an interesting view, simply because I do not think Song of Solomon could be any clearer on what it is discussing. It is a highly sexual book.

I think you are forcing the bible to conform to our culture where "pornography/erotica" are so disturbingly used, and therefore we swing to the other side of the pendulum, rejecting all things sexual as dirty or sinful. Scripture is scripture, and it includes a frank discussion on celebrating marriage, with the challenge to not awaken love until its time. That is the book of Song of Solomon. To pass that off as not sexual in nature seems a hermeneutic injustice.

The book applies both to what you mention above and to Christ and his relationship with his bride, the church.