Song of Songs as Parable
An essay on reading the Bible literally
The Song of Songs has long puzzled interpreters. Is it erotic poetry? A celebration of human love? Or does it speak of something deeper? In what follows, I point to a traditional literal approach to Song of Songs that defines it as a parable. According to Nicholas of Lyra (1270–1349), a well-known medieval interpreter of Scripture, the literal sense of the Song centres on its being a parable.
As a possible alternative to today’s literal readings of the Song, this article retrieves Nicholas of Lyra’s approach. I am not arguing that he is correct, but only that he gives us another way to think of reading the Bible literally that can help us see and know God’s word with clarity.
Nicholas of Lyra: signs and things
Nicholas is aware of various approaches to the Song of Songs by Christian and Jewish interpreters alike. Not satisfied fully with any single approach, he falls back on a traditional distinction between words and signs, as well as accepting the genre conventions of parables to make his case.
In the course of his argument, Nicholas cites Judges 9:14 which says, “Then all the trees said to the bramble, ‘You come and reign over us.’” Now, the words of Scripture speak of two things: trees and the bramble. Yet these two things point to the Shechemites and to Abimelech. By reading the text’s words (signs), grasping the things (trees, bramble), one then moves to what the things signify. This is precisely how Nicolas of Lyra defines the literal sense of Scripture: “And the literal sense is this, not that which is signified by the words, but that which is signified by the things signified by the words” (Song of Songs, 31).
Nicholas applies this principle, as illustrated in Judges 9:14, to point out that the Song of Songs is also a parable. He first defines parable lexically as a combination of para (besides) and bole (thought), and concludes: besides what is signified (e.g., trees, bramble), another word or thought is signified (Song of Songs, 31). Hence, as a parable, Song of Songs portrays a king and his romantic interest (things), which themselves signify something else: God and his people. This reading constitutes, for Nicolas, the literal sense of the text.
At one level, this definition is obvious. Judges 9:14 clearly is a parable, and its literal sense is not to say that trees will serve a bramble. Rather, the literal meaning is that the Shechemites will serve Abimelech. By parallel, if Song of Songs is a parable, then it follows that its literal sense will be about something other than the king and his beloved.
What is the parable about?
For a moment, assume that the Song of Songs is a parable, which means its literal sense is about something other than the things written of (king, beloved). What might that mean?
Here is Nicholas’s argument: the Song itself alludes to divine love through its language. So Song of Songs is about God’s love for his people as illustrated through the love of Solomon and the Shulamite.
For example, the book presents Solomon’s love for the Shulamite in ways that remind readers of God’s love for Israel. Consider how Solomon leaves the wilderness and arrives in Jerusalem to marry his bride:
“What is that coming up from the wilderness like columns of smoke, perfumed with myrrh and frankincense, with all the fragrant powders of a merchant? Behold, it is the litter of Solomon! Around it are sixty mighty men, some of the mighty men of Israel” (Song 3:6–7).
The Song describes Solomon as a “column of smoke,” bringing to mind the way in which God protected Israel from Egypt during the Exodus (Exod 13:21–22). Solomon then leads the men of Israel from the wilderness to Jerusalem, to Zion, to marry his bride (Song 3:11). The consummation of the marriage between Solomon and his bride is like a return to Eden (Song 4:16–5:1).
The greatest of songs, the Song of Songs, is a song that celebrates a royal marriage—a marriage (a thing) that signifies another thing: God’s marriage to Israel. Like Hosea’s marriage to Gomer, Solomon’s marriage to the bride intentionally symbolizes God’s relationship with Israel. The Song of Songs is written to be a parable; that is the author’s intent.
The Song of Songs not only alludes to God’s covenant with Israel, but the entire book celebrates one of the greatest mysteries in the universe: marriage. According to the Apostle Paul, human marriage is a mystery that points to the love Christ has for his church: “This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church” (Eph 5:32). Applied to the Song of Songs, Solomon, in the line of David, points to the ultimate Son of David, the Christ. The bride refers to the church.
This type of reading might make us uncomfortable. After all, it does not feel right to equate sexual love with the love that Christ has for his church. But we must realize that marriage is a mystery that points to the intensity of God’s love for us, and that love is pure. Today, we tend to think of sex in pornographic terms due to the over-sexualized culture in which we live. But sex itself is pure, holy, and part of what makes a marriage a marriage. It points to God.
Yes: the groom is Solomon. Yes: the bride is the Shulamite woman (Song 6:13). But the Song of Songs is also meant to give insight into one of the greatest mysteries in the universe: Christ’s love for the church. All marriages do this, but the greatest of songs is an inspired account of the holiest of loves: “For love is strong as death, jealousy is fierce as the grave. Its flashes are flashes of fire, the very flame of the LORD” (Song 8:6). Love’s fire is as powerful as the death-defying love and the fiery jealousy of the LORD.
Who are the characters?
If the Song is a parable, does that mean we should not take the story historically but as parabolic writing? Perhaps. But just as Hosea truly married Gomer, yet that marriage signified God’s relationship with Israel, so I find no reason that Solomon could not historically have loved the Shulamite.
One part of the story gives me pause, however. The bride’s description as the Shulamite (הַשּׁ֣וּלַמִּ֔ית) looks to be a feminine form of the name Solomon in Hebrew (Song 6:13). The symbolism of the name suggests that the parable does not record historical events. Further, since the book ends with the climactic moment when love is defined as “the fiery flame of Yah[weh]” (Song 8:6), it stands to reason that the theological purpose of the book is not to convey historical narrative but divine love.
That said, my approach to Scripture is to exercise caution in judgments. And while the book may communicate a parabolic meaning (sometimes called allegory), my literal approach to Scripture prevents me from dismissing the possibility that Song of Songs conveys historical narrative.
What exactly is going on then when it comes to things and signs?
In Scripture, signs refer to the words on the page. But sometimes they point to real things like the tabernacle or the curtain within it. However, the curtain itself points to Christ’s flesh, as Hebrews 10:20 tells us. So in this sense, God divinely revealed the true tabernacle in heaven to Moses (Exod 25:40) to teach us about Christ, the Word, who would “tabernacle among us” (John 1:14).
The uniqueness of Scripture, as Thomas Aquinas explains, is that the Bible gives us signs that speak about things, and those things bespeak realities that God intended. So the tabernacle is about Christ, and Song of Songs is about God’s love for us in the mystery of marriage, of Christ and the church (Eph 5:32).
The particular language that Nicholas uses relies on Augustine of Hippo’s work On Christian Teaching. There, Augustine lays out how Scripture provides signs, things, and things that the things signify. The signs might be words like trees and bramble; the things are the trees and bramble themselves; and the things signified by these things are the Shechemites and Abimelech.
Applied to the Song of Songs, we might say the words speak of Solomon and the Shulamite. The things are Solomon and the Shulamite (and their love). The things signified by these things are God’s love for his people, inclusive of Israel and the church.
Conclusion
On this approach, the Song of Songs is not merely a love poem. It is a parable whose literal sense points beyond the king and his beloved to God and his people. Through the mystery of marriage, the Song reveals the intensity of divine love: a love as strong as death, as fierce as the grave, and as consuming as the very flame of the LORD. Which love in marriage always pointed to Christ’s love for the church (Eph 5:32). And that, Nicholas tells us, is the literal sense of the Song of Songs.
Further Reading
https://ca.thegospelcoalition.org/article/three-ways-misread-song-songs/
Nice, thoughtful article again, Wyatt. You weave a lot of Scriptural concepts together. Scripture often reveals things in layers. Earthly realities often convey truths about heavenly ones.