Wait, They Said What?! (YWS Week 27)

Welcome to a year of reading Richard Sibbes together! The reading plan for the entire year can be accessed here. I encourage you to stick with us, allow yourself time to read, and soak in the riches of this gifted and prolific Puritan preacher. You will be edified and encouraged.

If you have trouble with how Sibbes used words, check out the Lexicons of Early Modern English for definitions from the period.

Bowels Opened Study Plan

1. Discuss Biblical Hermeneutics, which is the science of biblical interpretation.
2. Explore various interpretations of the Song of Solomon.
3. Brief outline of what I believe to be a correct interpretation.
4. Canonization – Why is this book in the Canon?

Summary/Engagement

Last week we defined terms for biblical hermeneutics, the science of interpretation, and I made the assertion that Song of Solomon is often interpreted incorrectly. The discipline of biblical hermeneutics seeks to ensure a repeatable process for the correct understanding and interpretation of Scripture. The author determines the meaning, hermeneutics is the tool we use to determine what their meaning was. We have similar rules in all other things we read, notwithstanding the foolishness taught by many colleges that the reader or the text itself determines meaning, rather than the author. That is relativistic tripe. If anyone but the person who creates the work determines the meaning, what use is the author?

A Few Interpretations of the Song of Solomon

Ok, given what I said last week and above, let’s consider a few of the predominant interpretive styles of the Song of Solomon.

1. The Allegorical Interpretation – There are multiple allegorical interpretations as the idea of hidden meaning leads to creative imagination rather than discovering the author’s willed intent. Some Jews hold the the book to be an allegory of Yahweh’s relationship with covenant Israel. Similarly some Christians view it as a relationship between Christ and the Church. They argue that elsewhere God speaks of his relationship to his people like that of a husband to his wife. The problem arises because the Bible never speaks of that relationship in a sexual way. In fact, ascribing a sexual aspect to the relationship of God and man is Pagan in origin. Similarly the idea of hidden meaning is Gnostic in origin. Whichever allegory an interpreter settles on is incorrect. The reader cannot determine the meaning, which is what imaginative allegorical interpretations do.Our guy, Sibbes, laid out in the very first sermon of Bowels Opened what he felt the allegory of the Song of Solomon was. He said, “So this book contains the mutual joys and mutual praises betwixt Christ and his church.” The only problem with this is the text does not support that interpretation. We’ll get in to that next week.
2. The Cultic Interpretation – There are some that hold this book to be an erotic story taken from the fertility cults of the false gods of Tammuz and Baal. Yes, that Baal. The problems with this are many. Suspending for a second that it is heretical, the book doesn’t have the major themes associated with fertility cults. There is no dying and rising god who fought with some dark god and now needs the help of a lover to resurrect. The Song of Solomon is also not structured as a pornographic hymn but as a love song/poetry. This is an important difference between cultic fertility hymns and the poetry that it actually is. These interpreters also hold that the necessary information to support this interpretation was removed when it was put in to the canon. These claims are simply unsupportable and speak of ulterior motives for the scholars who hold to such a reckless interpretation. (Remember, not all Bible scholars are believers.)
3. The Dramatic Interpretation – Others hold that the Song of Solomon is a drama. A play or lyrical ballad that tells the story of Solomon and the Shulammite girl. This interpretation holds forth this drama depicting Solomon and his one true love. The only problem with that is we also know Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. (1 Kings 11:3) Are we supposed to believe that in the most egregious adulterer in the Bible he had some idealistic notion of true love for but one? The other major problem is the lack of drama as a literary genre in the ancient near east at that time. The Greeks developed it in the fifth century, far after the book was written. There is also no commonality between Greek drama and the book, thus ruling out a later influence and revision of the book.

So, what does it mean?

These are but a few of the incorrect interpretations. All of them suffer from the same error; they do not let the Author speak. Allegory is an imposition of meaning by the reader on the text. The Cultic interpretation is an agenda in search of a victim. There is no support for their interpretation either. This is another case of the reader imposing meaning on the text. The Dramatic interpretation, without textual evidence, is again a case of the reader pushing meaning in to the text that the text does not support.

Why? Why are there so many interpretations? What does the book actually mean, then? Next week we’re going to explore what I think the author willed to convey, as well as talk about valid implications based on that. (Meaning – That pattern of meaning the author willed to convey by the words he used.)

Helpful Links

A COMPLETELY FREE online Hermeneutics class taught by Dr. Danny Akin, President of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. Check it out!

Two helpful books:

1. Robert Stein: A Basic Guide To Interpreting The Bible.
2. Robert Plummer: 40 Questions About Interpreting The Bible.

–

Last week, we read the First Part of Bowels Opened.

Next week, we read the third part of Bowels Opened, and consider its canonicity.