Sunday: Indivisible Life
Based on the following passages, how would you characterize the Bible’s view of the human body? Gen. 2:7; Ps. 63:1; Ps. 84:2; 1 Cor. 6:19-20; 1 Thess. 5:23.
Some religions believe in dualism, a philosophy that views the human body as a problem for the life of the spirit. That is, the body is deemed bad while the “spirit” is deemed good. In Scripture, however, the human body, including its sexual characteristics, is integral to the whole being. Life is “body” and “spirit” (see Gen. 2:7). The psalmist gives the whole of himself in worship to God (Ps. 63:1, Ps. 84:2). The total person is to be sanctified, set apart for the holy purpose God intended.
A positive view of the human body, in the context of sexual relations, is reflected in the Song of Solomon. How do these texts reveal this attitude? Song of Sol. 1:2, Song of Sol. 1:13; Song of Sol. 2:6; Song of Sol. 5:10-16; Song of Sol. 7:1-9.
Image © Review and Herald Publishing Assn. Goodsalt.com
Throughout this sacred text the human body is admired. The physical aspects of married love are not an embarrassment. A full range of emotions is openly presented.
Powerful sexual taboos typically exist in many cultures. Married couples thus often find it difficult to communicate in healthy ways regarding their intimate life. Similarly, children are often deprived of the opportunity to learn about sexuality in the setting of a Christian home where godly values can be integrated with accurate information. The Bible’s openness with sexuality calls His people to a greater level of comfort with this topic so that this vital aspect of life is treated with the respect and dignity due so great a gift from the Creator.
| How can we protect ourselves against cultural and moral forces that either make sexuality into nothing but degrading animal passion or turn it into something shameful that must never be talked about? How does the Bible show us that both extremes are wrong? |
(34)
One of the characteristics of the modern age is that sex is the currency of social capital for many. It is a commodity to be given or withheld as you seek to place yourself in the hierarchy of social life. In so doing it has lost its sense of intimacy. The very worst of it is seen in the recent spate of celebrity fallouts where powerful men have been accused of seeking sexual favors as a means of manipulating women. Take a look at much of the media advertising too and most of it contains some sort of sexual innuendo. Such commercial use creates an association of ideas that reduces the value of intimacy.
This poem captures the essence of intimacy.
In our modern world, it is important that we work to retain the intimacy of romantic love. And that is a lot more than just having sex with one person. Building intimacy is something that must be worked on outside the bedroom. Maybe we can explore that idea a bit this week.
Maurice is not intimacy outside the bedroom romance? I believe romance is part of intimacy without sex. So you maybe more romantic than you perceive yourself.
Hehe! You will have to ask Carmel that question! Romance is something that we men don't like to talk about among ourselves as it appears "sissy". However, if we want to a sparking relationship we need to explore innovative ways to romance our wives and make them feel special.
Here is just one idea that I use. It is a long time since I have given my wife a "bought" birthday/anniversary card. I always take the time to handcraft one using my graphic arts and photographic skills. It is only a small thing, but she appreciates the fact that she is worth more than a bought card with someone else's words in it.
Perhaps we could share a bit more here on romance skills, particularly for us men.. I am pretty sure that we are much worse than women when it comes to romance.
I realize this lesson is attempting to promote the Song of Solomon as a sexual relationship between a man and a woman, husband and wife. Tell me how many women here would love to have their noses compared to the towers of Lebanon? Or their breast compared to a CLUSTER of grapes??
In 1 Kings 4:32 we find that Solomon spoke 3000 proverbs AND wrote 1005 songs! And yet God in His infinite wisdom chose THIS Song to be included in His Word! Why? Is it really ONLY about “a positive view of the human body, in the context of sexual relations?” I think not! People came from all over the “world” to hear the wisdom of Solomon (see 1 Kings 4:34). THIS Song is the Song he gave to each that came! This Song IS indeed a prophetic love song between Jesus and His people, specifically the 144,000!
Just a small example of what I mean:
“Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine.” (Song of Solomon 1:2)
“Let Him kiss me with the kisses of life-both physical and spiritual, for Your love is better than the doctrinal wine of the Scriptures.”
The word translated "kiss" comes from Strong's # 5410 which means "to fasten up, to touch, to equip with weapons, armed men, to rule!"
Mouth also could mean "as the means of blowing, speaking, + two edged sword!!"
Look at the rest of these through prophetic eyes! Myrrh is a healing balm, to lie between the breast is to draw close to ones heart!! Think about these things!
“A bundle of myrrh is my well beloved unto me; he shall lie all night betwixt my breasts.” (Song of Solomon 1:13)
“My Well Beloved is like a bundle of healing myrrh unto me, He will lie over my heart and comfort me all through the dark times-when the world turns from the light of truth.”
“His left hand is under my head, and his right hand doth embrace me.” (Song of Solomon 2:6)
“Jesus’ divine left hand holds my mind, and with His human right hand He embraces me.”
This is my view as the language of the book is similar to isaiah 5 which is about christ
The interpretation that Daniel proposes is typical of the allegorical method of interpretation which was popular in the Dark Ages and paved the way for all sorts of non-biblical doctrines and practices. It nurtured the attitude that only the "learned" could understand the Bible. This method was soundly rejected by Martin Luther and other Reformers, thus paving the way for the Reformation.
The Reformation and Adventist view of biblical interpretation is to interpret the Bible literally unless context makes clear that another application is necessary. For the Song of Solomon, the literal interpretation is of a love poem regarding a bridegroom/husband and his bride/wife. There is no context that necessitates a different interpretation.
There are a number of references in both the Old Testament and the New Testament in which God represents Himself as the Lover or Husband of His people. You already mentioned Isa 5:1, which is only a passing reference. But you can also check out Ezekiel 16:1-63, Ps 127:2, Isa 54:5, Ps 108:6, Isa 61:10, Isa 62:5, Matt 9:15, Matt 25:1-13, Mark 2:20, Rev 21:9, Rev 22:17, and more.
The fact that God calls Himself a bridegroom or husband does not mean that every instance of husband, wife, bridegroom and bride refer primarily to God and His people. Many passages in the Song of Solomon are powerful metaphors for God and His people precisely because the primary meaning is about a lover and his bride. Humans understand the intimate relationship of love and marriage, and that's why God used this as a metaphor of His relationship with His people.
By contrast the allegorical method of interpretation denies that the primary meaning of the Song of Solomon refers to a lover and his bride. After all, the church that taught this method believed in the dualism of body and spirit, with the body creating problems for the good "spirit," as the lesson author points out. This belief led to the monastic system with celibate priests and nuns. This lesson rightfully pushes back against that belief system.
the human body should be honored and not worshipped. sexual relationships are commanded by the LORD to be heterosexual and monogamous. Any other teaching is sin.
The biggest argument against dualism is the Sabbath. You see, a CREATOR Whose existence is outside creation (which includes time by the way), steps into time to commune with creatures - or matter - physical beings, who have flesh and blood and feelings and emotions!
Greek philosophers and their dualism theories cannot match the elevation that God puts on His creation, and His keen interest in their PHYSICAL being.
I am glad that this quarter is looking into the family life topic. I agreed with the person who said that Songs of Solomon is not one of those books that are frequently read. While it's important to focus on the spiritual aspect we need to strike a balance. I am a young person and I think at times the church is very silent on some of the very sensitive family life issues in the church. I concurred that when we are connected when God then everything else will fall in place. However, we look to TV, secular books for statements to relay to the person we are courting. Even Family life presentations outside of a formal settings is at times lacking. the intimacy theme is surfacely dealt with and it's taken for granted that once married it happens naturally. It's only in recent years that the use of the word sex is been mentioned in my church(country church). I used to think it's a bad word. Even to read from the bible some of the graphic details Solomon painted, it's a problem to some of the elderly members. It's like it's a condemnation/dirty words to state in church and worst the sex topic is not a forum for Sabbath. I get the impression that it's okay to keep that kind of talk in the bedroom and that only when there's an issue of adultry, fornication, promiscuity, sodomity, that the topic becomes relevant. It will be interesting to hear the responses if the Class should be taken on a whole. While the older members are squirming, we the younger ones are excited to hear more details and to formulate our very own romantic sentences. Having said that,ultimately it's important that we fall in love with Christ in such a way that our time and thought is captivated by the love we have for Him!