Did the Song of Solomon mention God?

[tonychanyt]

The Song of Solomon did not mention God at all except possibly in (ESV) 8:

6 Set me as a seal upon your heart, as a seal upon your arm, for love is strong as death, jealousy is fierce as the grave. Its flashes are flashes of fire, the very flame of the LORD.

very flame of the LORD
שַׁלְהֶ֥בֶתְיָֽה׃ (šal·he·ḇeṯ·yāhhttps://biblehub.com/hebrew/3050.htm)
Noun - feminine singular
Strong's 7957: A flare of fire

Jah or Yah (Hebrew: יָהּ‎, Yāh) was a short form of יהוה (YHWH). It was the same form as in "hallelujah".

New International Version translated it differently:

It burns like blazing fire, like a mighty flame.

In this case, -yah worked as an intensifying suffix. The Song of Solomon as translated by NIV does not mention God at all.

There were scholarships supporting both translations.

 

[Reluctant Theologian]

The text itself suggest a literal primary meaning: a love poem; a highly erotic one. Personally I don't think the author intended anything else but that. As far as I know allegorical interpretations (both in Judaism and Christianity) start to appear in the 2nd century CE.

Of course a reader is free to use some of the imagery to illustrate the desire and passion believers/the church may have for God and Yeshua, and the other way around, but IFAIK we cannot claim that is the meaning of the text.

 

[tonychanyt]

As far as I know allegorical interpretations (both in Judaism and Christianity) both start to appear in the 2nd century CE.

and the allegories are losing their popularity in the 21st century

 

[Reluctant Theologian]

and the allegories are losing their popularity in the 21st century

Mm, I sense a lot of resistance and reluctance to do that. Song of Songs is quoted in modern worship songs; many single Christian women (including nuns) see Christ as their husband - drawing inspiration from Song of Songs.

They may not realise how asymmetrical and gender-specific this metaphor is: a male believer would never be able to state Christ is his husband; it would conflict at all possible levels. In addition, as soon as single female believers labels Christ their husband, they would be in a de-facto polygamous situation, as Christ then obviously has many single believing women as wives.

The gender specificity of this allegory alone makes it unsuitable IMHO. The explicit erotic content is another aspect for me that makes it unlikely to have an allegorical intention.

One of first interpretation references to Song of Songs in early Christianity comes from Origin (+/- 184-253 CE); he states in the prologue of his commentary on Song of Songs: 'I advise and counsel everyone who is not yet rid of vexations of the flesh and blood, and has not ceased to feel the passions of this bodily nature, to refrain from reading the book and the things that will be said about it.', acknowledging the explicit erotic nature of the book. Origin castrated himself at a young age and felt compelled to interpret it allegorically.

I suspect the quick rise of asceticism in the church is strongly related to the pressure of interpreting Song of Songs as allegorical.

 

[awstar]

Do you have any information as to how the book made the cut into the canon of scripture?

I had problems with the gender specificity also, until I found some references (from where I do not remember) that the soul is referred to as "she". The soul being born again by the Word also fits nicely with the egg and sperm allegory.

 

[Reluctant Theologian]

Do you have any information as to how the book made the cut into the canon of scripture?

I had problems with the gender specificity also, until I found some references (from where I do not remember) that the soul is referred to as "she". The soul being born again by the Word also fits nicely with the egg and sperm allegory.

If you explore the situation near the end of the 1st century CE you will find a final decision for acceptance into the Jewish Canon seems to have been made. Rabbi Akiva seems to be the primary known source for being in favour of that. The school of Shammai seemed to have been less enthusiastic.

When the text itself only gives clues for primary literal interpretation, and is full of erotically charged imagery - I don't see why there would be any need to allegorise the text. Allegorising the sexual content quickly becomes awkward. If no problems arise from leaving the text exactly what it is, and interpreting it as such - why not do that?

One can draw parallels between the passion between a man and his woman, and that between God and Israel or Christ and his Church, but nothing in the text suggests that application.

The main characters in the text also are not married yet ... it's about desire.

On top of that - the imagery of the church as the bride of Christ is a result of supersessasionism/replacement theology, where the church is the new Israel. TNK/OT is full of imagery where Israel is depicted as the wife of YHWH, but in the New Covenant books/NT we virtually exclusively find the head/body metaphor for Christ and His church.

 

[eleos1954]

The Song of Solomon did not mention God at all except possibly in (ESV) 8:


very flame of the LORD
שַׁלְהֶ֥בֶתְיָֽה׃ (šal·he·ḇeṯ·yāhhttps://biblehub.com/hebrew/3050.htm)
Noun - feminine singular
Strong's 7957: A flare of fire

Jah or Yah (Hebrew: יָהּ‎, Yāh) was a short form of יהוה (YHWH). It was the same form as in "hallelujah".

New International Version translated it differently:


In this case, -yah worked as an intensifying suffix. The Song of Solomon as translated by NIV does not mention God at all.

There were scholarships supporting both translations.

It seems that God inspired the Songs of Solomon foremost to celebrate the beauty and joy of a wholesome love relationship between a man and a woman!

Can also be seen as a typological approach that remains faithful to, and even enhances, the literal sense of the Songs, by recognizing what the text itself indicates—that human love (agape) typifies the divine. Throughout His written Word God uses the wholesome relationship between a man and a women to covey to us what divine love (agape) looks like. (ie marriage .... marriage of the Lamb with His people).

Revelation 19

The Marriage Supper of the Lamb​

6 Then I heard what seemed to be the voice of a great multitude, like the roar of many waters and like the sound of mighty peals of thunder, crying out,

“Hallelujah!
For the Lord our God
the Almighty reigns.
7 Let us rejoice and exult
and give him the glory,
for the marriage of the Lamb has come,
and his Bride has made herself ready;
8 it was granted her to clothe herself
with fine linen, bright and pure”—
for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints.

9 And the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.” And he said to me, “These are the true words of God.”

The Song of Solomon describes both marriage and God's relationship with His people. The Song of Solomon is not just about commitment and intimacy in the context of marriage; it also speaks to the type of relationship that the Lord desires to have with His people.

 

[Reluctant Theologian]

It seems that God inspired the Songs of Solomon foremost to celebrate the beauty and joy of a wholesome love relationship between a man and a woman!

Can also be seen as a typological approach that remains faithful to, and even enhances, the literal sense of the Songs, by recognizing what the text itself indicates—that human love (agape) typifies the divine. Throughout His written Word God uses the wholesome relationship between a man and a women to covey to us what divine love (agape) looks like. (ie marriage .... marriage of the Lamb with His people).

Revelation 19

The Marriage Supper of the Lamb​

6 Then I heard what seemed to be the voice of a great multitude, like the roar of many waters and like the sound of mighty peals of thunder, crying out,

“Hallelujah!
For the Lord our God
the Almighty reigns.
7 Let us rejoice and exult
and give him the glory,
for the marriage of the Lamb has come,
and his Bride has made herself ready;
8 it was granted her to clothe herself
with fine linen, bright and pure”—
for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints.

9 And the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.” And he said to me, “These are the true words of God.”

The Song of Solomon describes both marriage and God's relationship with His people. The Song of Solomon is not just about commitment and intimacy in the context of marriage; it also speaks to the type of relationship that the Lord desires to have with His people.

A bit late, but as discussed in this thread you-don't-have-to-like-her-to-love-her-really the popular idea that 'Agape' is a special word meaning noble/divine love cannot be supported from the Biblical texts; that idea developed from early church history into full-throttle in the Medieval period.

The metaphor of the Marriage of the Lamb in Revelations is beautiful, but theologians differ on whether this is about Israel (in TNK/OT this metaphor abounded) or the whole Church in general.

But still - just the use of that metaphor in Revelations cannot be taken as evidence that a love/erotic poem like Song of Songs ALSO should be interpreted allegorically. Nothing in the text of Song of Songs suggests that - on the contrary; at least for some acts in the book the lovers are not married yet because they meet in secret or long for future reunion without trouble. The literal theme is romance/eros - I find that impossible to allegorise - and IMHO luckily there is no need to.

 

[eleos1954]

A bit late, but as discussed in this thread you-don't-have-to-like-her-to-love-her-really the popular idea that 'Agape' is a special word meaning noble/divine love cannot be supported from the Biblical texts; that idea developed from early church history into full-throttle in the Medieval period.

The metaphor of the Marriage of the Lamb in Revelations is beautiful, but theologians differ on whether this is about Israel (in TNK/OT this metaphor abounded) or the whole Church in general.

But still - just the use of that metaphor in Revelations cannot be taken as evidence that a love/erotic poem like Song of Songs ALSO should be interpreted allegorically. Nothing in the text of Song of Songs suggests that - on the contrary; at least for some acts in the book the lovers are not married yet because they meet in secret or long for future reunion without trouble. The literal theme is romance/eros - I find that impossible to allegorise - and IMHO luckily there is no need to.

I would disagree .... it's both (it's about a loving relationship)

The Song of Solomon describes both marriage and God's relationship with His people. The Song of Solomon is not just about commitment and intimacy in the context of marriage; it also speaks to the type of relationship that the Lord desires to have with His people.