Patrick, respectfully, if this passage is about a love relationship it will have a lot to do with christian living and biblical worshiip. The same question could be posed about a lot of literal interpretations of texts. What does the rape of Dinah have to do with Christ? The death of Rachel? They all fit of course! They just aren't allegories.

Look I'm not ruling out any allegory but I'm convinced from the structure and content of the book that the primary intent of the author/authors was romantic poetry. Yes therein lies ample pictures of Christ and the church.

The book of Hebrews was included because the church thought that Paul wrote the book. Today almost nobody even within the Reformed church believes that Paul wrote the book. We have no idea what apostolic authority is behind the book. Yet we know it is scripture. It is sound and inspired.

The Song of Songs almost excluded from the Jewish canon much like the book of Hebrews was originally. They questioned the author's intent and considered it scandalous romantic literature. So to respond to Jonathan there are your Old writers right there. Those that composed the Jewish canon felt that it was romantic literature. Eventually it became their opinion that it was allegorical. That's why it was included. The popular opinion today [b:116ec56e69]among biblical scholars[/b:116ec56e69] is that their original suspicion was right. And that that's ok. It's still the word of God. It does picture Christ and the Church but it also includes wonderful romantic poetry. The Bible is diverse and varied in its forms and genres. Isn't it great to have a book like Song of Solomon to keep us from Prudishness?

__________________
Ian Brown
Attending Messiah's Covenant Community Church.
Student at Hunter College CUNY