The Puritans were not prudes, but the caricature has some basis in fact. Again the Song of Songs provides a neat barometer. Scheper juxtaposes a medieval monk’s interpretation of the “breasts” of the Song with that of two Protestant interpreters. The results are . . . . Continue Reading »
the Protestant commentaries almost uniformly adopt a primarily ecclesial allegory, with the tropological dimension as a valid application. But so, in fact, is the medieval tradition built on the foundation of the ecclesial interpretation, and even those commentaries devoted most strikingly to the . . . . Continue Reading »
The modern oblivion of the book has tended to blind us to the really crucial position it holds in exegetic history, not only for the question of allegory but for the central matter of the relation of divine to profane love, and in fact, as Ruth Wallerstein has said, the Song involved for the Middle . . . . Continue Reading »
there is a certain discrepancy between the purity of these theoretical statements, polemical in context, and the actual exegetic practice of the Reformers. Moreover, the rejection of allegory and the insistence on one undivided sense hinged for the early Reformers on maintaining a radical . . . . Continue Reading »
Carey Ellen Walsh ( Exquisite Desire ) points to the difference between classical responses to desire and the account of desire in the Song of Songs. Using Odysseus and the Sirens as an illustration, she notes how this scene reveals the Greek instinct that desire “harbors danger by . . . . Continue Reading »
Love is as strong as death. But no stronger. It’s a standoff. No, Jenson says: “death does not allow of stalemates. If love binds lovers even in death’s despite, death is overcome by love. Nor does the grave allow of partial retrievals; if it yields its . . . . Continue Reading »
Barthian that he is, Jenson gets the point of the Song’s “seal on my heart” just right: Jesus’ “death has made us the seal of his identity: he dies ‘for’ us, in identification with us. Now he is not what he is without us; he did not go into death . . . . Continue Reading »
Robert Jenson ( Song Of Songs (Interpretation, a Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching) ) notes that Song of Songs 8:6-7 contains “pervading reference to the myths of Israel’s religious milieu: ” Mot can indeed be translated simply ‘death,’ but it is also a . . . . Continue Reading »
Jealousy refers to a relentless and exclusive passion and attachment. For Solomon, it is as hard as the grave. Once someone goes into the grave, the grave doesn’t let him back up; once it takes hold, it doesn’t let go. Jealousy is like that. It is “that . . . . Continue Reading »
Given the “canon” that Scripture speaks “doubly” of Christ (sometimes divinely, sometimes humanly), it would seem easy for Athanasius to shuffle passages about the Father giving and the Son receiving to the “humanity” side of things. He doesn’t, and . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
