View Single Post
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 06-19-2004, 11:55 AM
Ianterrell Ianterrell is offline.
Inactive User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 960
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Okay the "Christ-centered" hermeneutic argument is being brought up here. I think some people here are confusing types with allegories. All moral marriages are evocative of the Christ-church dynamic. The question is whether or not the author specifically had a messianic spark while he wrote about Noah's Ark, or Isaac and Esau. Those who are arguing for the Allegorical position on Song of Solomon, do you all feel that the story of Solomon and The Shunnamite woman is as allegorical as Ps 45? Is the narrative between the Man and his wife a secondary interpretation?

You see this is my problem with the Allegorical Position it seems to say that the historical narrative is not as important as the picture of the Christ and his church. If I was forced to view ever "jot and tittle" as being [b:fec77d1750]primarily[/b:fec77d1750] a picture of Christ it seems like Abraham and Isaac, Joseph and his brothers, David and etc would all have to take a back seat to a spiritualized hermeneutic. My question is I guess where do you draw the line with such an interpretation. Why is it so offensive to take the Song of Solomon as poetry about love? Most modern scholarship seems to take it this way along with several big names like Sproul, WIllard.

I've seen some really bad attempts at using a consistent Christrocentric hermeneutic. One of my former pastors took this approach, and took every little step David takes as an allegory. I feel that Allegory Principle people do this with Song of Solomon unnecessarily. Honestly, I don't see why beautiful sexual desire between husband and wife has to be [b:fec77d1750]obscured[/b:fec77d1750] by a hermeneutic that in my opinion cannot sustain itself througout the book. There is no continuous narrative. There is ambiguity in who is speaking in the book at different times. It is widely accepted among modern biblical scholars that there are several poems in the book and not just one.

Interpretation that looks like this I cannot take seriously: The bride's two breasts = Old Testament, New Testament. This is honestly how many have interpreted the very mention of breasts, why? Could there be some unspoken hesistance to just have a man pleased by his love's breasts.
__________________
Ian Brown
Attending Messiah's Covenant Community Church.
Student at Hunter College CUNY