I know some of you may have seen this, but in light of my post on Ed Young flirting with the prosperity peddlers, I thought this was a good glimpse into one man's ministry - a man who is unafraid to stand for truth. I pray that God would raise more like him.

It is hard to find good material on the question about the purpose of the book - The Song of Solomon. Tommy Nelson, who is a good man, and gifted Bible Teacher and Pastor at Denton Bible Church has said, "Based on what God knows about us, He has provided an instruction manual in the Song of Solomon with eight very enlightening, explicit, and highly practical chapters on the topics of love, sex and intimacy." Pastor Nelson takes a similar approach to Driscoll and to be fair, a host of other good men. This is a most difficult book to be sure. It sure seems that the easiest way to interpret the book is in its most plain sense. But the problem for me is that I come to the book with a Major presupposition in mind. That presupposition is that all Bible books are about Christ in some way. I believe this is what Jesus had in mind on the Road to Emmaus in Luke 24. If I'm right in my presupposition then the Song of Songs is either about Christ or should be torn from the canon.

Ray Stedman said this about the Song of Songs and I found it helpful.

" The book describes married love as God intended it to be. It is important to see that. For the full abandonment to one another in mutual satisfaction which is described in this book is possible only because it is experienced within that total oneness which only marriage permits. That is strongly emphasized throughout this book by a three-fold warning which the bride addresses to the unmarried girls -- the chorus referred to as the daughters of Jerusalem. Three different times the bride, turning from her rapture and her delight with her love, gives these girls the secret of this delight:

But of course we have not heard the deepest message of this song until we pass behind the description of this purely physical human love, perfect as it is, to read it as an expression of communion between man and God, between Christ and his church.  From the very earliest Christian centuries, this book was taken in that way. Even the Jews took it allegorically in that sense. The preface to this song in one of the Jewish books, or Targums, reads something like this:  This is the Song of Solomon, the prophet king of Israel, which he sang before Jehovah the Lord.  You see, he wasn't singing just a purely human love song. He sang this before Jehovah. This was a song about his own relationship to his God, and the early church fathers took it in that light. It was because of this interpretation that this song was such a comfort to the persecuted saints of the Reformation and the post-Reformation periods."  Stedman 1965 - Message No: 22 Catalog No: 222

I believe wholeheartedly in studying the grammar to its full extent for proper exegesis.  I believe it is a must!  But if Christ thought that the OT was about him, and interpreted the OT and Himself as the chief figure then how can the book be about sex in marriage?  Doesn't the book of Hosea spell out the possibility of type and shadow pointing directly at Christ and the Church?  If the Song of Songs is only about sex in marriage then let's tear it out of the canon.  Books that aren't about Christ are at odds with how Christ interpreted the Scriptures.  Preaching and teaching books of the Bible that ignore how the text is about Christ is at odds with the Lord's own hermeneutic.  He is the best expositor of His own books.  What say you?

Gage Browning

Post Tenebras Lux

Is there any question now that Ed Young Jr. is now more impressed with the prosperity gospel than ever? Is there any outcry? Joel Osteen has denied the exclusivity of Christ on more than one occasion. Just google Joel Osteen and Larry King and you'll see it. It is amazing to me how many times I heard, "we have the right message, just different methods"...now it seems we have even abandoned the message.I can't tell you how many times I've heard my friends in the "Seeker realm" say they have the right message, just different methods. Now it seems that Finney's methodology has been infused with Finney's theology and no one seems to care. You know I used to say about my Baptist friends, "you know at least you can count on the baptists for being true to their Bible." "At least you can count on the Baptists to draw a line in the sand when it comes to flirting with the 'blab it grab it', 'health and wealth' side of charismania." Now one of the largest churches in America is not only proud of Joel Osteen's work in Houston, they are associating with it. Is there anyone at Southwestern Baptist Seminary who will stand up and say "Enough"! "Enough!" How about Southern Seminary? How about...anyone? Where are the W.A. Criswell's when we need them?

 

 

 

 

 

There have been many things said about the book.  I want you to watch Mark Driscoll's little ditty about the book of the Song of Solomon.  Then let's talk about it.  I'm basically asking if his direction is helpful?  (Despite his scatology)...Is it the direction that the author of the book wanted us to go?  Should we approach and interpret the book another way?  If so...what way?  In other words- is the book about Christ or is it about sex, sex in marriage, a fruitful sex life in marriage, or great sex in marriage? 

Please note that I am not in any way endorsing his jokes.  I detest them but I've already blogged much about that. 

So does anyone care to tell us what the book is about?  Any ideas?  Any thoughts about what Driscoll says it's about at least? 

Gage Browning

Post Tenebras Lux

RC interviewed Ben Stein about his new film.  It's worth checking out.  I think the movie will be as well.  You can watch the interview here.  Anyone?

Gage Browning

Post Tenebras Lux