Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan

Song of Solomon

Recommended Posts

[:"blue"] Many of you are familiar with Marian G. Berry's "Prophetic" Song of Solomon. The General Conference was going to have her write a Sabbath School lesson on the study until she departed from sound doctrine and started some splinter groups. Nonetheless, when I spoke with a brother at the biblical research department at the GC a few years back, he told me they have no problem with her original study on the prophetic Song of Solomon. [/]

[:"red"] "The Song of songs, which is Solomon's. Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth; For thy love is better than wine. Thine oils have a goodly fragrance; Thy name is as oil poured forth; Therefore do the virgins love thee." 1:1-3 [/]

"And Solomon's wisdom excelled the wisdom... he spake three thousand proverbs; and his songs were a thousand and five." 1 Kings 4:30, 32

[:"blue"] The Song of Solomon is only one of many of his songs.

Viewing the book from a prophetic point of view, Solomon (the king) represents Jesus and Shulamita (the bride) represents the church or the sinner. From a prophetic viewpoint, it is a love story between Christ and fallen man[/]

"while he was yet afar off, his father saw him, and was moved with compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck and kissed him." Luke 15:20

[:"blue"] The father's kiss to the prodical son can be compared to Solomon's kiss. Both the prodical son's father and Solomon represent Christ. The kiss is a kiss of reconcilation. This is how the play starts. The first scene of the first act starts with a kiss of reconcilaition. [/]

"Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts." Jer. 15:16

[:"blue"] It is also significant that the kiss is one on the mouth. Reconcilation to God comes through the Word which procedes from the mouth of God. [/]

"Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God." Mark 14:25

[:"blue"]Jesus said He would not drink wine util He returned. Shulamita was willing to wait for His love as it is better than wine. She is as the bride in Rev. 19.[/]

"Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready" Rev. 19:7

"walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour." Eph. 5:2

[:"blue"] The sinless life of Christ is the sweetest fragrance ever on the earth. In prophecy a woman represents a church, which are made up of people. Shulamita says the virgens love the King because of His fragrance. [/]

"if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto myself." John 12:32

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Shane


  • Ron Lambert


  • bevin


  • Jeannieb43


[:"blue"] The Song of Solomon in a prophetic view highlights salvation as being relationship based. [/]

[:"red"] Draw me, we will run after thee: the king hath brought me into his chambers: we will be glad and rejoice in thee, we will remember thy love more than wine: the upright love thee. 1:4 [/]

"if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto myself." John 12:32

"For the love of Christ constraineth us" 2 Cor. 5:14

[:"blue"] In the play, Shulamita tells her King if He draws her she will come. [/]

"Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish." Matt. 25:1, 2

[:"blue"] Christ draws each of us and as the Holy Spirit touches us we either draw near or resist and push away. We decide if we will be like the five wise virgens or the five foolish virgens. [/]

"Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus" Heb. 10:19

"if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also." John 14:3

"I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name." Rev. 3:8

[:"blue"] Shulamita says her King has "brought me into his chambers". After ascending into heaven Christ went to work in the heveanly sanctuary. His ministry there makes it possible for Him to bring His bride (the church). [/]

"After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." 1 Cor. 11:25

[:"blue"] The daughters of Jerusalem sing, "We will be glad" and "we will remember Thy love more than wine" So while Christ is finishing His work in the heavenly sanctuary, the church waits and remembers. [/]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard it said that Song of Solomon is a prophetic depiction in symbolic form of the on-going relationship between Christ and His church throughout the ages. Chapter five verses 2-8 represent the 1888 episode in SDA church history, when Christ came with the offer of a clearer message of righteousness by faith, one which Ellen G. White said was "the third agenl's message in verity," and was met with rebuff and rejection by the church leadership. Eventually, the brethren gave in to Ellen G. White's continual support for the preaching of Jones and Waggoner and rebuke to the leadership for their resistance, and they made a big deal of trying to embrace the 1888 message. Only problem was, by then no one knew what it was any more (Ellen G. White said the third angel had gone back to heaven and the light had been withdrawn); even Jones and Waggoner who originally presented the 1888 message had become confused. Many embraced the pantheism heresy of Kellogg a few years later, supposing it was the 1888 message. Our church nearly fell into serious heresy. As it was, most of the health professionals and some ministers who followed Kellogg were lost to the church, along with the world-famous Battle Creek Sanitarium.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is well known that the Song of Solomon is a very erotic collection of fun songs describing fun activities.

You have to be a real wowser to try to pretend that the primary meaning is prophetic or symbolic.

Why are we so scared of legitimate sexuality?


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Bevin on this one. <img src="/ubbtreads/images/graemlins/amen2.gif" alt="" />

I recall reading an account of one person's childhood in a very fundamentalist church, where a preacher gave a sermon on the Song of Solomon and had to find a symbolic application for everything. So in describing the bride's physical charms, one breast symbolised the Old Testament, the other breast symbolised the New Testament, and the space in between represented the time period between the two. <img src="/ubbtreads/images/graemlins/laughhard.gif" alt="" />

The Song of Solomon is all about a husband and wife enjoying their sexual relationship and delighting in their love for one another. If it was really necessary to find another interpretation, we have the analogy of Jesus being the bridegroom and the church being the bride.

In orthodox Judaism, students of the Scriptures are not allowed to read the Song of Solomon until they get married or reach the age of 30. Sounds like age restrictions on sexually explicit literature to this day. <img src="/ubbtreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />


Link to post
Share on other sites

[:"blue"] There are multiple ways to read the Song of Solomon. That is not to say, this way is right or that way is wrong. In actuallity it is a play, written to be performed on a stage. Each that views it may be blessed in a different way. [/]

[:"red"] I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon. 1:5 [/]

"Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy." Rev. 3:4

"Before I was afflicted I went astray: but now have I kept thy word." Ps. 119:67

[:"blue"] The hebrew word translated "black" is shachor and can also be translated as "dark" or "dusky". The Spanish Bible translates it as "brown" or "tan". In prophecy "white" represnts righteousness. Here we hear Shulamita admit she is black or dark representing apsotacy.

While the Jews, during the time of Christ, were in apostacy, they preserved the written Word.



"But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children." Luke 23:28

[:"blue"]The daughters of Jerusalem, or Jews, would not accept Jesus and would find themselves outside of the kingdom. Kedar were the decendants of Ishmael. The curtains of Solomon, a reference to the curtains in the temple of Solomon, seperated the sinners outside from God inside.

So the Jews during the time of Christ were "black" or in apostacy, set to lose the kingdom and be seperated from God. Their only means to be reunited would be through Christ, the Bridegroom.[/]

Link to post
Share on other sites

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

. Chapter five verses 2-8 represent the 1888 episode in SDA church history

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Are you one of those guys that gives away the end of a movie you have already seen when watching it with others that haven't seen it yet? Hahahahaha... Don't worry. We'll get there. All in good time <img src="/ubbtreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bevin, you readily accuse some of us of being "afraid" of frank eroticism, as if that would be the sole purpose of a book preserved in the Bible. Obviously you are moving farther and farther away from any acknowledgement of the miraculous as a real part of earthly existence. I would question why you seem to be AFRAID of a frank acknowledgment that Song of Solomon could actually have prophetic significance? Then again, do you believe any part of the Bible is really prophetic?

Link to post
Share on other sites

[:"red"] Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me: my mother's children were angry with me; they made me the keeper of the vineyards; but mine own vineyard have I not kept. 1:6 [/]

"Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." Matt. 21:43

"And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard. What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes? And now go to; I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard: I will take away the hedge thereof, and it shall be eaten up; and break down the wall thereof, and it shall be trodden down: And I will lay it waste: it shall not be pruned, nor digged; but there shall come up briers and thorns: I will also command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it. For the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant plant: and he looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for righteousness, but behold a cry" Is. 5:3-7

[:"blue"] The Jews were not faithful keepers of the vineyard. So the kingdom was taken from them and given to the Gentiles. [/]

Link to post
Share on other sites


can you tell us what the preservers of the Book used it for? How did the original social group of people that wrote it, copied it, and read it view it?

I can easily invent prophetic meanings for the text on the wrapper of a candy bar. I can also see animal shapes in clouds forming overhead.

Is any part of the Bible truely aimed at describing events significantly after the writing of it? Yes. Jesus clearly does this on several occassions. Paul and John also clearly talk about times after their own. Isaiah also.

But in this case you are taking words that have a clear immediate application, and inventing something underneath them without any clear indication that

(a) there is anything there, and

(B) that you are getting anything out that you haven't put in.

That isn't prophecy - it is ink-blot pop psychology.


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bevin, this may fly against the "faith" of those who insist that everything in the Bible had to have a local application, but this is just another way people of a liberal bent tend to deny the miraculous in the Bible. The idea that everything in the Bible had to be understood by people at that time is absolutely false. Consider what the Apostle Peter said:


Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. To them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to us they were ministering the things which now have been reported to you through those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things which angels desire to look into."
(1 Peter 1:10-12; NKJV)

Notice that the prophets who wrote the prophecies often did NOT understand them, and they studied the prophecies themselves trying to figure out when and how they applied. Notice also these words: "not to themselves, but to us they were ministering".

Also note the following statement by the Apostle Paul which speaks to the same point:


Now all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.
(1 Cor. 10:11; NKJV)

Link to post
Share on other sites


The idea that everything in the Bible had to be understood by people at that time is absolutely false.


I never said EVERYTHING had to have a local application. I asked for any evidence at all that Song Of Solomon should have a prophetic application.

You did not address ANY of my questions/issues.


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's true, Ron - bevin very clearly said that some Biblical literature is identifiably prophetic in form and intent, but that he can't see the evidence that the Song falls into that category. I'd like to see you take that question seriously and answer it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[:"blue"] The poetic tone of romance in the Song of Solomon makes the gospel such a sweet and enticing invitation. [/]

[:"red"] Tell me, O thou whom my soul loveth, where thou feedest, where thou makest thy flock to rest at noon: for why should I be as one that turneth aside by the flocks of thy companions? 1:7 [/]

"The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want." Ps. 23:1

"My people hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have caused them to go astray, they have turned them away on the mountains: they have gone from mountain to hill, they have forgotten their restingplace." Jer. 50:5

[:"blue"]Jesus is not the only shepherd spoken of in the Bible. Shulamita here calls out to the Bride, "Tell me... where Thou feedeth". She does not wish to be lead astray by other shepherds.[/]

"He maketh me to lie down in green pastures" Ps. 23:2

[:"blue"]Shulamita desires to rest "where Thou makest thy flock to rest" [/]


Link to post
Share on other sites


Bravus said:

I'd like to see you take that question seriously and answer it.

Whether or not you have all the answers, Ron, that were being asked for, there is something else to consider when you reply as the Holy Spirit brings to your mind, His thoughts. That is , in any public forum God is wishing to reach many hearts where the Word is respectfully considered.

You can be assured that at least one person has received the testimony you gave, even if/when He does not reveal to you, who that person is.

Thank you, for the Word. It was a blessing to me, not having remembered the principle for a long time.

[:"red"] "The rain and snow come down from the heavens and stay on the ground to water the earth. They cause the grain to grow, producing seed for the farmer and bread for the hungry. It is the same with my word. I send it out, and it always produces fruit. It will accomplish all I want it to, and it will prosper everywhere I send it." [/]

Isaiah 55:10,11 NLT


Keep the faith!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Lifehiscost, I appreciate what you said.

Bevin and Bravus, the Bible is different from all other religious literature. It alone has been invested with supreme authority as the Word of God, on which all faithful children of God base their faith and practice, and knowledge of reality, as well as allowing it to inform conscience and provide the basis for all humanity to be judged. If you believe that the Holy Spirit truly has inspired all Scripture, then it is therefore not a trifling question to ask why the Holy Spirit chose to include Song of Solomon in the Bible. If it's only purpose is to present some mildly erotic literature sheerly for the sake of "culture," then what is it doing in the Bible?

The Bible admonishes us that spiritual things are spiritually discerned. You have to have a mindset where you are willing to accept the miracle of divine inspiration of the Bible in order for the Holy Spirit to be given to enlighten you any further. And as we study the metaphors, types, and symbols of Scripture, we find that they come in various levels of sophistication. The meaning of some are plainly stated, for the benefit of beginners. But the Bible does not always spell out explicitly what is metaphor, type, or symbol. We can be intelligent in observing how a figure is being used, we can see the context, and how the figure is used elsewhere in Scripture, and we can draw the reasonable conclusion that a figure is being used as a metaphor, type, or symbol. We do not always have to have a clearly stated definition like we see in Revelation 7:15: "The waters which you saw...are peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues."

Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingle argued heatedly over the saying in Mat. 26:28, "This is my blood...." Luther never could accept that it was not meant literally. He demanded that the text would have to say, "This is like [or as] my blood" in order to be a metaphor. Zwingle rightly recognized that most metapohors in Scripture, even most of the symbols in Revelation, are not accompanied by the words "like" or "as". In fact, the above quoted Revelation 17:15 does not include "like" or "as" even though it is clearly defining the symbolism of "waters" in the prophecy.

When we come to Song of Solomon, there is no explicit statement that this is prophetic, containing metaphoric characterizations of the relation of Christ and His people. But those with spiritual discernment who are willing to consider this possibility, can see that it fits--it works--when we compare the statements and events of Song of Solomon with what we know of the history of the church. We may not see every detail, but we can see enough of a match to suggest to us that this could be a valid interpretation, worth studying further. As we follow along with this assumption, and startling truths jump out at us, this strengthens our belief that the book is prophetic.

For those willing to receive this, whose spiritual discernment can see clear meaning in this, it is a blessing and encouragement. It helps us appreciate how God feels about the way our church resisted His truth and rejected His Spirit in 1888, and it shows in a true light how lost we were left when we tried to regain the light after it had been withdrawn. It gives us hope, because it turns out well, after our time of anguish and repentance.

Another example of something that seems to be a type that most overlook as being such, are the narrative portions of Daniel. It is intriguing how faithfulness in diet prepared Daniel and his friends to meet the challenge of Nebuchadnezzar's dream, so that Daniel could also be given the same dream, and the interpretation to give to the King. Is there a possible parallel here to the experience of the faithful during the final conflict? Will faithfulness in diet have a part in preparing people to stand during the final conflict?

Look at Daniel chapter three, where a great image is set up, and everyone is commanded to worship it, and a death decree is issued for anyone who will not worship it. Is there not an obvious parallel to be spiritually discerned to the events involving the image to the beast that all on earth will be required to worship on pain of death, as set forth in Revelation 13?

Then consider Daniel chapter five. Could this have relevance to the experience of God's people in the time of the end? In chapter three, we saw where false worship was commanded. In chapter five, we see where true worship is forbidden. Does this possibly instruct us that in the time of the end, the faithful first will face a test over being required to engage in false worship, and then matters will get even worse when true worship is forbidden?

Remember what the Apostle Paul said: "Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come." (1 Cor. 10:11)

Daniel 1, 3, and 5 are indeed types, if you have spiritual discernment to see it. If you do, you will be benefitted and blessed by it, because we see that faithfulness in trivial things like lifestyle reform can make a great difference in our spiritual growth. We see that God was with His faithful people in the fiery furnace and delivered them from it. And we see that He shut the lions' mouths and delivered Daniel from the wrath of the lion.

Another type to be seen in the experience of ancient Israel: When they camped at Kadesh-Barnea, and chose to believe the opinions of the faithless spies and reject the testimony of faithful Joshua and Caleb, and as a result were turned again to the desert sands to wander for another 40 years in the wildernss--that was a type that applies to the Seventh-day Adventist Church in its 1888 experience. Except we have been turned again to the desert sands for much longer than 40 years.

Those who are hardhearted and determined to resist the miraculous in Scripture, who refuse to believe God truly has the power to see the future so completely that He can give us such types as well as detailed prophecies in Scipture, and that He cares enough for us to do so--those who prefer the mundane, are welcome to their chosen mundaneity. The Lord gives everyone what they really want.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, Ron, I do definitely appreciate the effort and the study, and understand better where you're coming from.

I don't so much appreciate the on-going slaps at those who disagree with you as 'hard-hearted' and unspiritual and unwilling to follow the guiding of the Spirit:

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

Those who are hardhearted and determined to resist the miraculous in Scripture, who refuse to believe God truly has the power to see the future so completely that He can give us such types as well as detailed prophecies in Scipture, and that He cares enough for us to do so--those who prefer the mundane, are welcome to their chosen mundaneity. The Lord gives everyone what they really want.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I know I'm not, and I'm fairly confident that bevin is not, claiming that the Bible never prophesies of the future. The question is quite specifically whether Song of Solomon prophesies of the future. Asking for clear evidence from the text that it does is not at all the same as claiming that no part of Scripture is prophetic.

You wrote: </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />

If you believe that the Holy Spirit truly has inspired all Scripture, then it is therefore not a trifling question to ask why the Holy Spirit chose to include Song of Solomon in the Bible. If it's only purpose is to present some mildly erotic literature sheerly for the sake of "culture," then what is it doing in the Bible?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> but you see, you've assumed that which you are setting out to prove: that erotic literature is trivial. I would say there are many excellent reasons for the Holy Spirit to have included this book in the Bible, and that one of the most important is the glorification of the spiritual love between a husband and wife.

The union - of mind, body and soul - that is portrayed so movingly in the Song of Solomon is a deelpy spiritual connection between lovers, and its counterfeits cause so many of our problems in the world today. Eros love between husband and wife is very, very far from trivial. The Bible is strong on condemnations of the counterfeits of sexual love, and this passage provides a rich depiction of the ideal that God has planned for us.

It also acts as a type for the deep spiritual desire for and connection we have with God and he with us. I would argue that this is the purpose of the book, and provides enough 'freight' for it to carry without also loading it up with prophetic visions of the far future.

Anyway, this is a dialogue that I'm learning a lot from, and I thank all the participants. I do wish it were possible to conduct it with a little more respect...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: "The idea that everything in the Bible had to be understood by people at that time is absolutely false."

I agree with the above statement. But, I will expand upon it, as I am one who has said that we who seek to understand the Bible must seek to understand it's meaning to the people to whom it was written, whether in the 1st Cent. CE, or the 8th Cent. BCE.

1) There is a great difference between saying that we should understand the meaning of a text to the people living in that time, and to say that the text had to be understood by either those people, or the one who wrote it. They are not the same. I will clearly agree that there are Biblical passages that either were not understood by the one writing it, and the people of that time, or were only partially understood.

2) When I say that we should seek to understand the meaning that a text had to people living in that time, I do not say that our understanding should be limited to their understand.

Let me give an example: Isaiah 7:13-17 is a clasic example of what I am talking about. I will suggest that the meaning to the people listening Isaiah was that some local woman would give birth to a son. As to who that local woman might have been, that is not clear in the Isaiah text.

Matthew in 1:22-23 takes that Isaiah text and applies it in a prophetic way to the birth of Christ. I do not argue that point, and I am willing to do the same. If someone were to tell me that Isaiah probably did not see it as a prophecy of Christ, I would not argue. I would simply say that we are not limited in our understanding of a text to the understanding that people had of it at the time and place that it was first said.

3) A little more on application: Our first step in understanding a Biblical passage might (let us not argue order of priority) be to understand how people living in the time it was writen understood it.

Then when we went beyond that, which I allow, we need to be very careful. We should not approach scripture by reading our own stuff into it. The technical term for what we should do is exegesis or letting the Bible speak for itself and tell us what it is saying.

As to the Song of Solomon, we must be extra careful that we do not read our own stuff into it. There is a school of thought that attempts to understand it in a prophetic sense. There is also a school that sees it in a more human sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[:"blue"] For the first time in the drama, the Bridegroom speaks. The gentleness and nonjudjmentalness of the Bridegroom is endearing, soft and touches one emotionally. [/]

[:"red"] If thou know not, O thou fairest among women, go thy way forth by the footsteps of the flock, and feed thy kids beside the shepherds' tents. 1:8 [/]

[:"blue"] Shulamita had called out and asked her King where He was feedig His sheep. Notice when He answers her, He does not call her black or dark. He calls her fairest among women. Like the church of Smyrna, He says [/] "I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich)Rev. 2:9

"Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus." Romans 3:25, 26

[:"blue"] Shulamita here is not black because feeling her need for her King, she has been clensed by Him. [/]

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me" John 10:27

"That thou mayest walk in the way of good men, and keep the paths of the righteous." Prb. 2:20

"Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful." Ps. 1:1

[:"blue"] The Bridegroom lovingly tells Shulamita to follow the footsteps of the flock. [/]

"I have likened the daughter of Zion to a comely and delicate woman. The shepherds with their flocks shall come unto her; they shall pitch their tents against her round about; they shall feed every one in his place." Jer. 6:2, 3

"Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching." Heb. 10:25

"So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs." John 21:15

[:"blue"] The Bridegroom tells Shulamita to "feed the kids besides the Shepherd's tents" This He tells her just as Peter was told after having denied Him. Just as Peter had entered into a new relationship with Christ, Shulamita had passed from being black to being the fairest of all women and she too is told to feed His kids. [/]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I neglected to give some logical, objective reasons for drawing the parallels indicated in my previous post, which reinforce the idea that certain things can be taken as types.

It is always worthwhile to consider the circumstances of God's people when a prophecy or Bible narrative is inspired. In the case of Daniel, God's people were in captivity, dealing with ancient Babylon. Revelation tells us that in the final conflict at the time of the end, God's people will have to deal with a world-dominating entity called "spiritual Babylon." It is God who established one as the type of the other when He chose to call the end-time world-dominating power "Babylon." It may very well be that God chose to give the prophecies recorded in Daniel when He did because that time was a logical precursor or type of the end time. It also is apparent that even the narratives in Daniel concerned events Inspiration selected because of their relevance to the end-time. The circumstances establish the parallel.

The same is true of the book of Esther, though in Esther's time Babylon had given way to Medo-Persia. The death decree in Esther is particularly important to the final generation of God's people that will pass through the final conflict, with its death decree.

In the case of the parallel of Israel in the wilderness encamped at Kadesh to 1888, we see the parallel in circumstances thusly: Israel had come out of Egypt, and were just on the verge of entering the Promised Land. Several times in Scripture, the deliverance from Egypt is used as a type of our deliverance from sin. As Israel then was led through the wilderness to the Promised Land, so also we in the last days seek the Promised Land of Heaven, which we believe we are very close to entering. Thus the circumstances allow parallels to be drawn which in turn allow us to take the experience of Israel then as a type of what God's people today experience as they are just about to enter the Promised Land. The principles of sin, righteousness, the grace of God, and sinful human nature, remain the same now as in ancient times.

As for Song of Solomon, we find these parallels: The key characters are the king of Israel and the betrothed wife of the king (which sounds somewhat suggestive of the Queen of Sheba in places). The Bible frequently takes the king of Israel as a type of Christ, because Christ is the true King of Israel. And the betrothed wife of the true King of Israel is the church.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Ron Lambert said:

Thank you, Lifehiscost

Your welcome Ron.

Usually I don't spend a lot of time reading long treatises

on the Scripture, as I find far more value in using the same amount of time reading the Scriptures. However on occasion there are times when God asks me to listen to one of His servants for the purpose of sharing the insight they have received from Him. Such was the case as I read over your post.

While Bravus brought out some points re: to your post, that could have been better left unsaid, my mind has not changed about the over all theme of your post.

The subject of note re: the intimacy of these two main individuals has long been a point of deep understanding to me in how intimate Jesus wishes to be with us as individuals. The fact that man has spoiled the picture by making the flesh a major portion of his enlightenment, contrary to the spiritual significance of the intimacy of God, doesn't take away the lesson provided for those who wish to go beyond the surface understanding.

[:"red"] "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." [/]

John 4:24 KJV

[:"red"] "For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please. " [/] Galatians 5:17 NASB



Bevin and Bravus, the Bible is different from all other religious literature. It alone has been invested with supreme authority as the Word of God, on which all faithful children of God base their faith and practice, and knowledge of reality, as well as allowing it to inform conscience and provide the basis for all humanity to be judged. If you believe that the Holy Spirit truly has inspired all Scripture, then it is therefore not a trifling question to ask why the Holy Spirit chose to include
Song of Solomon
in the Bible. If it's only purpose is to present some mildly erotic literature sheerly for the sake of "culture," then what is it doing in the Bible?

Still thanking you for a post seen useful for a spiritual step forward, but not denying the limitations of our best efforts. LHC

Link to post
Share on other sites

[:"red"] I have compared thee, O my love, to a company of horses in Pharaoh's chariots. Thy cheeks are comely [pretty] with rows of jewels, thy neck with chains of gold. We will make thee borders of gold with studs of silver. 1:9-11 [/]

"Hast thou given the horse strength? hast thou clothed his neck with thunder?" Job 39:19

"That led them through the deep, as an horse in the wilderness, [that] they should not stumble?" Isa. 63:13

"There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." 1 Cor. 10:13

[:"blue"] The Bridegroom tells Shulamita that He has compared her to a company of horses. The Bible says a horse is strong, swift, fearless and surefooted. Christ has assured His bride that He will provide her strength that like a tree, she will not be moved. [/]

"And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth." Rev. 5:10

[:"blue"] Continuing with the horse metephor, He imagines a jeweled bridle and collar. This is not just any horse but the horse of Pharaoh. She is royalty.[/]

"Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints." Jude 3

"For they shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy neck" Prb. 1:9

[:"blue"] These "ornaments of grace" are to enable the Bride to present her faith as beautiful as she is feeding His "kids". We see here the Bridegroom compare the Bride to a strong horse of royalty covered with jewels. This is not one that needs to be ashamed to be in her Master's service but says,[/]"He brought me to the banqueting house, and his banner over me was love." 2:4

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is much too much uncertainty as to who it is that is speaking at a given point that one cautions inferring too much from what is basically an anthology -- by structure, not the carefully structured story of redemption that Writ, otherwise, presents.

However, sez I, should one employ the Canticles as mnemonics, there can only be approbation.

That said, the reference point regards “compared” 1:9 is not to be passed over, as it proves interesting that the horses of Pharaoh’s chariots were always stallions and rather than reading a comparative ‘likeness’ as interpretation… perhaps a synonym yielding a brush painting a Shulamite mare contrastingly to the stallions of Pharaoh's chariots -- would also yield insightful implications.

Carry on..., --of themselves, other perspectives are always rewarding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Song of Solomon 1:9 says: "I have compared thee, O my love, to a company of horses in Pharaoh's chariots." This is a text that defines for us the meaning of the prophetic symbol of horses in apocalyptic prophecy. It has reference to the church militant, as Christ rides upon it into battle against evil in this world. (See Revelation 6:2; throughout Zechariah chapter six; etc.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...