This post focuses on the main four different interpretations of the Song of Songs. Each view is accompanied with an an example of how each interpretation deals with a portion of the text. Finally, I describe which view I hold to and why.
For the past few posts that have dealt with Old Testament history and certain portions of those texts, while each topic could have much more space and time given to it to describe it fully, the constraints I was working in were being limited to a two page maximum article. For some of these topics, especially this one, there could be entire books published on these topics. So to spend only two pages on a topic of this breath is a bit of disservice but also allows the opportunity to introduce the topic to the audience.
THE FOUR DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF THE SONG OF SONGS
There are four main interpretations of the Song of Songs book. They are the “Allegory of God’s love for Israel,” “Allegory of Christ’s love for His bride, the Church,” an “Extended type of the Christ-Church marriage illustration,” and the view that exalts love as the most powerful and desirable of human emotions. The first view, the allegory of God’s love for Israel, appears to be what the Jewish rabbis taught the Jews. This view allegorizes the passages in Song of Songs and applies it to the Jewish people. For example, Song of Songs 1:5, “I am black but lovely, O daughters of Jerusalem…” the Jewish rabbis taught that Israel was black with sin because they made the golden calf at Sinai. However, Israel was made attractive by receiving and obeying the Ten Commandments. Another example is taken from Song of Songs 1:13, “My beloved is to me a pouch of myrrh which lies all night between my breasts.” The rabbis interpret this as the Shekinah glory in the Tabernacle is between the two cherubim that stood over the Ark of the Covenant. This view tries to spiritualize the text when the text is not actually saying what the interpreter believes it is saying. The problem with allegory is that the interpreter can make the text say virtually anything they want; there needs to be some form of validation in the interpretation for this view to work.
The allegory of Christ’s love for His bride view follows a similar pattern and encounters similar problems. This view takes Song 1:5-6 as meaning the Church is ugly and unattractive because of sin. However, the church is now spiritually lovely because she has been converted. “The flowers have already appeared in the land; the time has arrived for pruning the vines, and the voice of the turtledove has been heard in our land” (Songs 2:12). The view takes the flowers and the needed pruning as referring to Christ coming into the world, while the voice of the turtledove being heard means the apostles have preached the gospel to the world. This view believes that the bundle of myrrh in Song 1:13 is Jesus Christ, the two breast as the two testaments, and He provides the bridge between the two testaments. Similar to the first view, this view is problematic because there is no way to validate these interpretations and the spiritualizing of the text can be taken anywhere to mean anything.
The third view which see a connection of the Song with a higher level fulfillment in Christ and the church is the “extended type of Christ-Church marriage illustration,” also known as the typical view. This view envisions Solomon as typifying Christ and the Shulammite woman as the church, therefore picturing Christ as the Bridegroom and His love for His bride, the church. This view is similar to the allegorical models discussed above, but it differs by interpreting Solomon as a literal, historical person. Also, this view does not seek mystical meanings for every detail as the allegorical approach does. The weaknesses of this view are that there are no Scriptural indications that this is a type of Christ and there are no verses in Song of Songs that can be interpreted as indicating the various aspects of Solomon’s life are divinely intended to represent a type of Christ.
Finally, the last view which sees Song of Songs as exalting love is also called the literal model. This view exalts love as the highest and purest human emotion, as well as exalting marriage as a created institution. It warns the couple to maintain the sanctity of the marriage and maintain a vow against premarital sex. This view is the only objective mode of interpretation and seeks to keep the normal, literal meaning of the words. This model provides a structure and unity to the book that others do not by looking at the major sections: courtship (1:2-3:5), a wedding (3:6-5:1), the ongoing or maturing marriage (5:2-8:4), and concludes with the nature of love (8:5-7) and how the love of the couple began (8:8-14). Using the literal method, we can see that beyond the symbolism, the maiden tells her lover that she has reserved the fruits of love exclusively for him (7:13).
Examining the evidence, I hold the literal view as the best model to interpret Song of Songs. While many Bible teachers use allegory to depict God’s relationship to Israel or Christ’s relationship to the church, Song of Songs gives no indication that this is the case, and it should be viewed as extolling human love and marriage.[1] This view seems to be the most in line with God’s views on the beauty, wholesomeness, and purity of marriage and stands in contrast to the world’s views on sex. Solomon is hardly a role model for the faithfulness of marriage and the maiden was just another number in his long list of lovers (6:8), however the literal view gives the reader the most objective and cohesive reading of the book that matches with the rest of Scripture while maintaining the integrity of the book.
[1] Roy B. Zuck, Basic Bible Interpretation (Colorado Springs, CO: Cook Communications, 1991), 223.