Against LSM's Allegorizing

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by kisstheson

Hello dear brothers Igzy and Ohio,

Is everything good between us regarding Song of Songs and which OT books are not quoted in the NT vs. which OT books are not quoted, alluded to, or contain verbal parallels with the NT? I hope all is good between us and I hope we are all reconciled on this point.

I was referencing the "Index of Allusions and Verbal Parallels" in the back of the USB4. According to this Index, Song of Songs is the only OT book which is neither alluded to in the NT nor contains any verbal parallels with any passages in the NT. As the example from the book of Obadiah showed, the scholar(s) who complied this index were fairly liberal regarding what constitutes an "allusion or verbal parallel". In spite of this fact, there are no entries for Song of Songs in this index. All that rich, poetic, symbolism and allegory in Song of Songs and neither Jesus nor His apostles ever touched it!

There never was anything but good between us. I only asked for clarification on your post since I have UBS3 and you have the later UBS4, which has another index which mine does not have.

Igzy brought up the point that SofS was just romantic in nature, and why should it be anything more. I am not sure either way, but since none of us is poetically fluent in the ancient Hebrew language, we really can't appreciate the song for what it is. Neither do we have the musical accompaniment, which, knowing Solomon, might have been symphonic with opera-like singers.

Since their is no N.T. mention, do you know how long it has been since the church has first interpreted the SofS allegorically?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

There never was anything but good between us. I only asked for clarification on your post since I have UBS3 and you have the later UBS4, which has another index which mine does not have.

Igzy brought up the point that SofS was just romantic in nature, and why should it be anything more. I am not sure either way, but since none of us is poetically fluent in the ancient Hebrew language, we really can't appreciate the song for what it is. Neither do we have the musical accompaniment, which, knowing Solomon, might have been symphonic with opera-like singers.

Since their is no N.T. mention, do you know how long it has been since the church has first interpreted the SofS allegorically?

Here's an interesting site on allegory of SofS, before and after Christianity.....
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_...fSongs-GTJ.pdf

[kisstheson]

Originally Posted by Ohio

There never was anything but good between us. I only asked for clarification on your post since I have UBS3 and you have the later UBS4, which has another index which mine does not have.

Igzy brought up the point that SofS was just romantic in nature, and why should it be anything more. I am not sure either way, but since none of us is poetically fluent in the ancient Hebrew language, we really can't appreciate the song for what it is. Neither do we have the musical accompaniment, which, knowing Solomon, might have been symphonic with opera-like singers.

Since their is no N.T. mention, do you know how long it has been since the church has first interpreted the SofS allegorically?

Hello dear brother Ohio. Thank you for your kind words. I appreciate your reply.

From my understanding, there were two Pre-Nicene "Church Fathers" who interpreted Song of Songs. The first was the partial commentary (perhaps most has been lost over the centuries??) by Hippolytus, written approx. 200 A.D.. Hippolytus viewed SofS as a kind of "love triangle" between Israel, Jesus Christ, and the Church. The second was a commentary by Origen, written approx. 240 A.D.. If I understand correctly, Origen was the first one to compose a commentary on the whole Bible. He would speak his messages, and his friends would write down what he said. Origen viewed SofS from much more of a mystical viewpoint, seeing a love story between a soul and Jesus Christ. If I understand correctly, Origen was the first to state that SofS should only be studied by those who are "spiritually mature" and that "immature" Christians could be harmed by studying SofS. While the interpretation of Hippolytus shows up here and there throughout Church History, it seems that Origen's interpretation has largely prevailed.

The well-known Eastern Orthodox "Church Father" Gregory of Nyssa published a series of 15 messages on Song of Songs in approx. 370 A.D.. Gregory appears to have followed the interpretation of Origen, that SofS is a love story between a soul and Jesus Christ.

Extremely influential for the Medieval Roman Catholic Church was the series of messages on SofS by Bernard of Clairvaux, spoken (and also written down) over a long span of years, 1135 - 1153 A.D. (If I remember correctly, some other Cistercian monks completed Bernard's series of messages.). I have read some of these sermons in the book Bernard of Clairvaux: Selected Works, which is part of the "Classics of Western Spirituality" series published by Paulist Press, and Bernard brings out some really rich points here and there. Interestingly, Bernard used the SofS as a kind of "springboard" to reflect on various current events, his own personal experiences, human life in general, and the importance of loving God.

Another collection of messages on SofS which I am familiar with is the series written by Teresa of Avila in approx. 1570 A.D., found in The Collected Works of St. Teresa of Avila, Vol. 2. She also followed the basic interpretation of Origen, seeing SofS as a love story between a soul and Jesus Christ, with her own unique emphasis on the culmination of this love story being the bliss of "spiritual marriage". I also have found many rich points in Teresa's messages, but I would warn readers that due to Teresa's Medieval Roman Catholic background, there are lots of references to "The Blessed Virgin Mary".

We all know about the interpretations of SofS by WN and WL. The interpretation of SofS from a "Protestant" viewpoint that I enjoyed the most is the one by Hudson Taylor in the short book Union and Communion, written in 1893. Another interpretation of SofS which I enjoyed was the one written by H.A. Ironside, consisting of messages spoken in 1931 and 1932.

I see that dear brother awareness has posted a link. I am sure that there is a ton of information out on the web regarding the history of the interpretation of the SofS by both Jewish and Christian authors.

I hope this helps, dear brother! Much grace, peace, and love in Christ be with you.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by kisstheson

I see that dear brother awareness has posted a link.

Here's something especially interesting, from that site :

A specimen of such allegory is found in Mekilta (Exodus),
Shirata, Beshallal:t, § 3:
R. Akiba said: I will speak of the beauty and praise of God before all
the nations. They ask Israel and say, 'What is your beloved more than
another beloved that "thou dost so charge us' (Cant. V, 9), 'that you die
for Him, and that you are slain for Him' as it says, 'Therefore till death
do they love Thee' (a pun on Cant. I, 3), and 'For thy sake are we slain
all the day' (Ps. XLIV, 22). 'Behold,' they say, 'You are beautiful, you
are mighty, come and mingle with us.'


Apparently, the Jews believed in mingling.....don't know if it is meant "mingle in our spirits," or, "come and party among us."