Holy of Holies: Returning to Eden 4 - Song of Songs, Celebrating Sex & Egalitarian Women

“Sex becomes a search. A search for something we are missing. A quest for the unconditional embrace. And so they go from relationship to relationship. The search is about that need.

But sex is not the search for something that’s missing. It is the expression of something that’s been found. It’s designed to be the overflow, the culmination of something that a man and a woman have found in each other.  It’s a celebration of this living, breathing thing that’s happening between the two of them.” (Rob Bell, Sex God, p. 123)

“KISS ME, make me drunk with your kisses!

Your sweet lovemaking is better than wine.

You are fragrant, you are myrrh and aloes.

All the young women desire you.”

(1.2-3, my translation)

Links to Previous Studies in this Returning to Eden Series:
1 - Song of Songs, Sexuality & Spirituality 
2 - Song of Songs & The History of Denying Sexuality
3 - The Song of ALL Songs or Just a Silly Little Love Song?

A Neo-Platonic Nightmare: Celebrating Sex!

Modern Evangelical and "Church of Christ" Christians have, at times, imbibed a worldview that is on many counts not simply unbiblical but anti-biblical.  As noted in the second of these studies (see Song of Songs & the History of Denying Sexuality here) in the second and third centuries Christianity drunk deeply from the Platonic culture surrounding it. This influence is seen in two ways: 1) the Gnostic rejection of creation and the Jewish Creator god with its denial of the goodness of that creation; 2) the denigration of sexuality, sexual urges, and the denigration of women as the agents of Satan for tempting men.  Sex became a “necessary evil” for the propagation of the race. The Song of Songs was a clear problem.  To fix that perceived problem allegory was resorted too. 

Plato in his Symposium, has Socrates waxing eloquently on the status of “love” (for the non-Greek reader the love in the Symposium is eros).  At the end Socrates offers the highest form of “eros” in which we get our notion of “platonic love” from.  None of the love(s) celebrated in the Symposiumis remotely like the biblical notion.  Women for Plato were worse than the animals (he says so in another Socratic dialogue Timaeus).  The greatest love was the pursuit of wisdom as understood by Plato. The appetites of the body were to be denied for that pursuit … indeed in Platonic salvation the “immortal soul” would one day be set free from the cage of the degrading body.

Modern Christians have, even unawares, often reflected that Platonic outlook.  Even as the rest of the world has become “liberated” so to speak the church has remained Victorian.  To associate Sexuality and Spirituality is virtually unheard of.  The impression that is granted to the world and even to many of our own members is that sex is tolerated (even though everyone does it!) but it is not to be celebrated as a good in itself.  And it is a faux paux to let others know you actually enjoy it!

The Joy of It All

How different is the Hebraic worldview from that of many in modern Evangelical Christianity.  The Proverbs declare

Let your fountain be blessed,

and rejoice in the wife of your youth,

a lovely deer, a graceful doe.

May her breasts satisfy you at all times

may you be intoxicated always by

her love!

(5.18-19, BV)

The worldview of Song of Songs is not confined to the Song.  Rather the worldview of Song of Songs is the worldview of ancient Israel.  The vision of Israel, expressed in the Song of Songs is the redemption of relationships.  Rather than being antagonistic to humanity as Gen 3 prophesies, creation is the setting for shalom in the Song for the love of the couple that is as unabashed as in the Garden.

If we believe in the canon of Scripture then the Holy Spirit is not shy about sex. Sexuality is a dominant theme in the Song.  It oozes sexuality!  This is sometimes obscured because of our Platonic lenses and unhappy English translations.  The Hebrew word ‘ahaba is a word that means love.  We read in 7.6 (v.7 in Hebrew)

mah yapit u-mah na’amt ‘ahabahba-ata’anugim

How splendid and how sweet you are, O Love among [all] the delights!

Love is an abstract noun here. But ‘ahaba is a fairly rare word in Song of Songs. But even in 7.6 it is the woman’s physical charms that elicit such an exclamation.  But the word that dominates Song of Songs from the vocabulary of “love” is dodim.  We encounter this word in the second verse of the book quoted above where I rendered it “lovemaking.” The root dd occurs a total of 36 times in Song of Songs.  That this word is explicitly sexual in nature we need only read Proverbs 7.18,

Come, let us take our fill of love until morning;

let us delight ourselves with love. (NRSV)

Or the explicit Ezekiel 23.17

And the Babylonians came to her into the bed of love, and they

defiled her with their lust …(NRSV)

Though the word may be rendered “love” in Hebrew it is always sexual love.  For other examples of dodim in Song of Songs see 1.2, 4; 4.10; 5.1; 7.13; etc [1]

Here a biblical book literally begins with a description of sexual desire and it is boldly stated.

Equal Opportunity Sex in the Song of Songs

Hers. The Song of Songs has dialogue present between the woman and the man; the woman and the daughters of Jerusalem, and the woman and the night guards.  The distribution of this dialogue is far from equal. The woman is far and away the primary speaker approximately 70 percent of the words coming from her mouth.  The woman is the primary “actor” in the book.

It is true the man does speak his praise for her in 1.9-11, 15; 2.2; 4.1-7; 6.4-9 and 7.2-10.  Yet he disappears (as far as a voice is concerned) completely in chapter 8.  Even when he comes to “his garden” it is only at her invitation (4.16-5.1a).

This woman is no passive lady! She does not let him set the agenda so to speak. For example she outdoes his praises for her by bragging on him (1.16-17; 2.3). She begins the Song and she ends the Song. She is the one who speaks its refrains.  She is the one who calls on her lover to do things – draw her after him (1.4), be like a gazelle (2.17), to come out to the fields with her (7.12-14), set her as a seal on his arm (8.6) and to flee with her (8.14).  She seeks him (1.7). She “seizes” him to bring him into the chamber of love (3.4 & 8.1-2).  She is such a powerful presence that in the middle of the Song he confesses to be driven mad by just one of her glances, with but one strand of her necklace (4.9)!!

She is hardly shy or even "polite" about her public praises of her man.  Her friends, perhaps tired of her continual bragging about his traits, finally say exasperation (5.9)

mah dodek mi(n)-dod se-kakah hisba’tanu

What’s so special about your lover, that you make us swear in this way?

This is no private conversation the woman is having.  She boldly declares “He Rocks!!” Of course that is a loose paraphrase but it captures the meaning quite well. She responds to her "critics" with a gushing report on his uniqueness.  To these friends/critics(?) she mentions his gorgeous head (v.11), his eyes (v12), his facial features (v.13), how she loves his puckered lips (v.13b), how hot his body is (v.14b), his legs and voice (vv.15-16). Finally she declares he is simply her “friend” (v.16b).  Such discourse was proper for God’s People in Israel.  One can hear Plato groaning ... and perhaps not a few church people too! She repeats this public praise of her man to the watchmen.

To say that Song of Songs smolders with sensuality is to make the proverbial understatement.  But here is the reality of the situation.  This is how God desires our love to be! In the song mutuality is the atmosphere that is breathed between the man and the woman.  She is not a passive entity but is the driver behind the entire book.

His. The man is not as articulate in the Song as the woman. However he is not shy about saying things about his isha.  In chapter 4.1-7 he erupts like a volcano about her. He unashamedly celebrates (as God directs in Proverbs) the “goods” of his “babe.” The poetry is exquisitely graceful. It is sensuous and replete with erotic imagery and allusions and wonderful word plays.  Here is a man who had indeed savored his woman and become “intoxicated” (to use Proverbs 5.18f). He begins with the particle hinneh (2x!).  He says

Wow! You are so beautiful, my love

Wow! You are so beautiful! (4.1)

The man is literally arrested at this moment - stopped in his tracks - by what he perceives to be her beauty [2]. She is not just any beautiful woman but his.  He takes delight in her beauty.  Twelve times in the Song her beauty (Heb, yapa) is proclaimed (1.8; 15 [2x]; 2.10, 13; 4.1[2x], 7; 5.9; 6.1, 4, 10).  What the man’s poem revels in is the beauty, the allure, sensuality, and delight he has for his woman’s body.  He even praises her breasts no fewer than four times (4.5; 7.3, 7-8. they are mentioned a total of 8x in the Song, 1.13; 4.5; 7.3, 7-8; 8.1, 8, 10).

This last point is more important than we might think. I find this “naked” admiration of the “Shulammite’s” physical beauty refreshing.  It reminds us that at the bottom God has created us as embodied creatures, biological creatures. Our bodies Matter! How anti-Platonic and anti-Gnostic.  The man’s admiration of his woman’s body leads to the valuation of her [3].

Wrapping Up For Today

The Song of Songs is powerful medicine in the Word of God for the warped views regarding sexuality both in and out of the church.  The Jewish worldview that God created us and made us by intent to be creatures in relationship – even intimate ones – is foundational.  The Song is the antidote to perversions of Sexuality whether that is asceticism or what might be called the Porn world. 

Sexuality is more than sexual intercourse but intimacy is celebrated as wholesome before God.  In the Song sex is good in and of itself.  It is not justified on the grounds of procreation but for delight and pleasure.

The Song reminds us of what God had longed for in the Garden of Eden.  In our marriages we can participate in and mirror a world that is creational and even redeemed.  The Song gives a balanced relationship between the sexes. In our culture in which wives are often treated more as property than partners, the woman is shown here by the Spirit’s intent as the more active partner.  It is an egalitarian relationship that exists in this relationship.

The Song has to be used to become effective in counter acting the corrosive effects of a history of misapplication in Christianity.  We must become comfortable in reading the book. In our own relationships we should “practice” using exotic metaphors to communicate the wonders and uniqueness of our spouse. What a gift. 

Notes:

1] For more on dodim see Daniel Grossberg, “Nature, Humanity, and Love in Song of Songs,” Interpretation(2005), 229-242.

2] See the excellent article by F. W. Dobbs-Allsop, “The Delight of Beauty and Song of Songs 4.1-7,” Interpretation(2005), 261-277, especially p. 262.

3] See the delightful discussion of this and similar “flavors” in Carey Ellen Walsh, Exquisite Desire: Religion, The Erotic and the Song of Songs (Fortress Press, 2000), 105-132.

Read More

Holy of Holies: Returning to Eden - the Song of Songs, Sexuality & Spirituality

"Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth.
Your love is more delightful than wine;
delicate is the fragrance of your perfume ..."
(Song of Songs 1.2, Jerusalem Bible)

"For in all the world there is nothing equal to the day on which the Song of Songs was given to Israel, for all the writings [i.e. Scriptures] are Holy, but the Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies." (Rabbi Akiba, Mishnah, Yadaim 3.5)

"Holy love is the only subject treated in this Song. We must remember that love reveals itself, not by words or phrases, but by action and experience. It is Love which speaks here, and if anyone wishes to understand it, let him first love. Otherwise it would be folly to read this song of love, because it is absolutely impossible for a cold heart to grasp the meaning of language so inflamed." (Bernard of Clairvaux, Sermon 70.1)

Song of Songs: Entering the Holy of Holies

The Bible. Sexuality. What word comes to mind next? Very few people I know, Christian or otherwise, would exclaim "Spirituality." Indeed though, as Richard Davidson has massively shown, "Sexuality is writ large on the pages of the OT" [1] the church, long infected with virus of Platonic dualism, has often made the assumption that Spirituality and sexuality are polar opposites. Because the church has viewed it this way the world has no reason to disagree!

The Song of Songs has always been a dangerous book for many precisely because it so viciously attacks any notion of dualism and is so unabashedly ... erotic. Erotic is the correct word - not pornographic - but erotic. And it is in the Bible. Which by its very nature demands we examine our, often, not only unbiblical, but anti-biblical assumptions about Spirituality and sexuality. Those are two notions that lie at the very core of being a human. Churches, and the world, are hurting deeply for the lack of witness of the Song of Songs.

Though many churches/Christians act as if they are embarrassed by the Sublime Song of Songs (echoes of the notion that sexuality is somehow tainted or less than holy - dualism!) it has historically been one of the most important books in the Christian canon. In another post I will give a brief overview of the history of the book, but for now we can say that during the medieval period the Song was viewed as a sort of Fifth Gospel! There are more surviving Latin manuscripts of the Song of Songs than any other biblical book. There are more medieval sermons from the Song than any other biblical book except the Psalms. Origen produced a massive 10 volume commentary on the Song. For comparison purposes there are 32 surviving Latin commentaries on the Song from the 6th to 11th centuries while Romans is represented by 9 and Galatians by 6. Bernard of Clairvaux (of whom I will say much more later) spent eighteen years studying, singing, praying and preaching through the Song ... and only made it to the beginning of chapter 3. The Jews have historically affirmed a very high view of the Song as witnessed by Rabbi Akiba and that the Song is read publicly as the text for the holiest worship day of the year - Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement).

Today the Song is, honestly, practically ignored among Christians. It is true that much of the history of interpretation of the Song has been allegory but the church was not afraid to read and preach the Song. However as Roland Murphy has pointed out, with Bernard specifically in view, "it is paradoxical that Bernard, for all his allegorical flights, often captured the literal meaning of a passage ON THE LEVEL OF EXPERIENCE" [2]. The monks understood on an intuitive level that God was in the mix - even in sexuality.

Yet it was the cancer of Platonic dualism drove many to view sexuality itself as nothing more than a "necessary evil." Thus the Song could not actually be celebrating something that was merely a necessary evil - that is needed for procreation. It was believed that to be truly "spiritual" one had to transcend the body, its functions and its needs/desires. This same worldview, and doctrine, moved some early Christians to deny the reality of the physical incarnation of the Logos and the Gnostics to deny the physical bodily resurrection of Christ and  of believers. The Song is a neo-platonic ascetic nightmare! It had to be "fixed!" For many that solution was allegory but we will see that Bernard though he embraced allegory never de-sexed the Song.

Modernists with a "modern" worldview often claim the Song is "secular." This is even the view of many Christians who radically misunderstand their own faith and worldview. These readers fail to grasp the worldview of ancient Israel - NOTHING WAS SECULAR in ancient Israel! These Israelites did not walk around dividing their days into sacred and the secular as the heirs of the Enlightenment do. They did not have "spiritual" time and "secular" time. Instead they viewed life holistically. Love is a human passion that is God inspired. Those readers who do not see "God" in every line of the Song have a malady that is largely self-inflicted. For the Israelite every moment of life was "infected" by God and this included sexuality. There are many "echoes" in the Song of other biblical stories so much so that ancient Israelite would in fact have seen sexuality, marriage, and burning desire for you mate as sacred. There is no dichotomy: Sexuality is Sacred precisely because it is from God ... and because that passionate intimacy mysteriously mirrors God's own Trinitarian passion. More on that later too.

Returning to Eden

There are many connections between the Sublime Song and the first three chapters of Genesis and I will argue for these as my blogs move forward [3]. In the Garden of Eden, the Bible remembers a paradisaical world. It was a world of love, a world of shalom, a world of mutuality, a world lacking shame. The Fall, Genesis 3, reveals that this world of beauty has been vandalized, even raped. The world in which Israel actually lived, that you and I live in, is a post Genesis 3 world. A world full of sub par relationships on every level. The "symphony of love" begun in Eden becomes the "cacophony of abuse" in the Fallen world. But I submit to you that the Song of Songs pictures the redemption of that symphony of love ... the Song is God's call for a return to Eden in the most holy relationship known to humanity - that between a husband and a wife. In the sexual relationship the Song loudly and proudly proclaims Paradise Regained. Even in the Fallen world we can experience Eden in our relationships - that is the vision of the Sublime Song. As we will see the Song does not see the couple as the "first couple" from Genesis. The Song is deeply aware that we live in a Fallen world but it shows the the woman and the man rediscovering Edenic values in even the most intimate area of their relationship. They relish one another.

In light of my conviction that Akiba was right, that the Song of Songs is inherently Spiritual, and inherently theological, I offer the following seven themes as a mini-Song of Songs theology of Sex as we move into these blogs. I believe these are all the Edenic values that God desires to be in our marriages. Each of these could be expanded greatly but for now I offer just brief commentary.

First, and this is so important, Sexuality is GOOD. Underlying the Song of Songs is the same profound Doctrine of Creation that permeates all of the Hebrew Bible. It is this high view of creation that biblical Spirituality will revel in. The Song of Songs is the verbal photo commentary on Ecclesiastes 3.11 that God "has made everything beautiful in its time." The Song extols and exhibits the creation of sexuality by God in Genesis 2.

Second, Sexuality is for Couples. Some have proposed various roles for Solomon, the shepherd and the woman. I have doubts that Solomon has any real role in the Song at all rather I see the woman calling her man "Solomon" is ancient flattery like a woman today bragging on her husband saying he is hotter than Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt or even Batman. This kind of ancient flirting is actually paralleled in the Ancient Near East as seen vividly in Egyptian love songs. In a return to Eden this couple is utterly "in to each other" and they make no Platonic apologies for it. May more wives and husbands embrace this biblical Spirituality.

Third, Sexuality, contrary to the Fall, is egalitarian. The Sublime Song represents a complete reversal of the values of the Fall. The woman in Song of Songs is hardly a passive docile "lady" in the Victorian Ideal. The egalitarian note is sung in 2.16 "my beloved is mine and I am his!" In fact the Woman Lover is the dominant personality in the Song. She carries on the majority of the dialogue (81 verses to 49). She initiates the meetings for lovemaking, she extols his "beauty" passionately ... in fact the man has no extensive voice until chapter 4. One of the most interesting questions in the Song is whether or not 7.10, "I am my lover's and his desire (tesugah) is for me" is a commentary of sorts on Genesis 3.16, "your desire (tesugah) will be for your husband." In the relationship, as God created it and as God desires it and the Song pictures it the man and woman in a mutual joyful love.

Fourth, related to the above theme, Sexuality is about wholeness. We are not creationally "whole" by ourselves. This theme is graphically shown in the Song by the anxiety the lovers feel during periods of the mate's absence (3.1-3; 5.6). Absence brings out the meaning of "presence" for the lovers. Lovers need each other to be whole. Each is capable of being independent but they have become "one flesh."

Fifth, Sexuality is multidimensional. Perhaps we can see the passionate love in the Song as a "live performance" of Genesis 2.24-25. The man is free and unfettered in the Song, and so is the woman. The woman and the man are in a free and spontaneous relationship. Within the Song they are in love for the sake of love. They find joy in mutual physical attraction with unapologetic, and sensually explicit, praise for one another as well as inward qualities of one another. Their relationship is total. After making him feel like he is Mr. Universe she turns and says "this is my beloved and he is my friend" (5.16). The Song reveals fidelity, loyalty and devotion to ones lover. The relationship is God's creational gift in its totality.

Sixth, Sex, is by God's design and intent, Pleasurable. Christians with a biblical worldview (as opposed to a neo-platonic, even neo-Gnostic, worldview) should not shy away from this. But sexuality is not simply intercourse but we need not be platonically ashamed or embarrassed of the goodness and "fun" of sex in our covenant relationship. Too long have we in the Church given the impression that a husband or wife are somehow less than Spiritual, holy, or godly if they are sexually excited by their spouse. They are supposed to be!

It is overlooked often so it needs to be stated forthrightly ... and in light of what many have claimed in the past ... sexuality is not by God's design fundamentally about procreation. That belief is a concession to Platonic dualism. The Song of Songs contains not a single reference to the procreative function of sexuality. As in Genesis 2, the sexual relationship between the Lovers is not linked to any utilitarian agenda. Sex in our covenant relationship does not need any justification to a "superior" end. The union of the lovers - the intimacy - alone is the joy and purpose of sexuality. The Song is not hostile to babies coming but that is not presented as the purpose of sexual intimacy. The Oneness, the intimacy, points beyond itself and mirrors our union with God himself. No wonder it is rapturous!

Seventh, finally, Sexuality is beautiful. Sexuality itself is presented in the Sublime Song as wholesome, good, enjoyable, something that is desired, that is enjoyed without the slightest embarrassment ... it is beautiful! As in Genesis 2, the Lovers in the Song are "naked and ... NOT ASHAMED!" Far from shame they relish it!

In the Song of Songs, though we live in the Fallen world, we have returned to the Garden of Eden. Though in a sinful world Lovers, even after the Fall, can still bask in the beauty of Paradise. The vision of the Song of Songs for our marriage relationship is nothing short of breathtaking. It is a vision we need to teach, preach, proclaim ... and model.

God knew what he was doing when he gave Israel the Song of Songs ... Rabbi Akiba was right. Bernard was right! One will never understand such passionately, even erotically, "inflamed" language if he or she is not first a lover. The plain, literal, sense of the Song of Songs is fraught with Spiritual and theological significance. From the "Old Testament" perspective God is everywhere involved in the Song and his creatures are shown enjoying his good gifts. They are shown basking and demonstrating Yahweh's own passionate love. Their love is just a reflection of that divine love. At the climax of the Song we read

"For Love is as strong as death,
passion as fierce as the grave;
The flash of it is a flash of fire,
a flame of Yahweh (salhebetyah) himself!"
(8.6, my translation)

The passionate love of humans is actually a flash of God's own love. Our experience of Love, as Bernard correctly (inspite of allegory) suggested points to the Lord of Passionate Love! Such is the theology and the gift of the Song of Songs for the church so horribly mired in platonic dualism.

Now here is a thought to think upon: What if when Lord commanded us to "love him with all your heart, with all your soul and all your might" (Deut 6.4) he had something like the passion revealed in the Song of Songs in mind!? I think he did.

Blessings as we read the Song of Songs together.

NOTES:

1]Richard M. Davidson, Flame of Yahweh: Sexuality in the Old Testament (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2007), 1. Davidson's study is far and away the most exhaustive study of sexuality in the Hebrew Bible measuring 700 pages of text and 150 pages of notes and bib. I disagree with Davidson on some particulars but this book is foundational now.

2] Roland Murphy, "The History of Exegesis as a Hermeneutical Tool: The Song of Songs," Biblical Theology Bulletin 16 (1986): 89

3] See especially Francis Landy, "The Song of Songs and the Garden of Eden," Journal of Biblical Literature 98 (1979), 513-528; Phyllis Trible, God and the Rhetoric of Sexuality (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978), 145-165; Richard Davidson, Flame of Yahweh, pp. 545-632

Read More