Every form of life requires pleasure. God as the most living one probably requires the most pleasure.
God would be self-sufficient in Himself, and I would think that He requires nothing, but desires much.
I admit that there is no explicit claim in the New Testament that I can think of that Song of Songs concerns Christ and His church.
Right, and Jesus, Peter, Paul, James, Matthew, etc, etc all take hundreds of OT scripture to point to Jesus. Nowhere is this book even mentioned. While that would not necessarily preclude it, I think it is something to consider, especially if you think it references the Rapture.
But there is no such claim that Joseph is a type of Christ either. Yet when we examine the life of Joseph there are uncanny similiarities. He was betrayed by his brothers for his "dreams" of authority. He was cast into a pit. He was lifted out in three days. He was sold for pieces of silver.
Yeah, but the similarities were made manifest in the New Testament. The Song of Songs has nothing pointing to it.
3.) Jesus said that something greater than Solomon was there when He was there. This indicates that what Solomon was is a shadow of the substance of a greater one.
He didn't say Solomon, he said Moses... Unless you are thinking of another piece of scripture. The only reference to Solomon uttered by Jesus, that I can remember off-hand, was during the Sermon on the Mount, and it had to do with how earthly riches are vanity compared to heavenly/spiritual gifts.
4.) The whole Bible ends with a romantic scene of a marriage between the redeeming God and His people formed into a Bride and Wife.
It is not talking about fondling breasts or touching holes unique to a woman. Songs of Solomon are.
Perhaps it is not necessary to you. MAybe you don't care about Christ and the church so for you it seems not necessary.
It seems disingenuous. I could find any book of the Bible and draw an extremely vague false parallel if I want. But I don't want to because it is not necessary. There are tons of OT scripture that evidently point to Jesus as the messiah. This book isn't even on the radar, IMO.
My point is that for some of us there is the need to be led deeper into its significance.
Precisely. And I fear that may be clouding an otherwise healthy judgment.
I think it also touches on the Second Coming of Christ. For example the last passage in the Song of Songs
quote:
"Make haste my beloved, And be like a gazelle or a young hart upon the mountain of spices" (SS. 8:10)
As the concluding word of this book, the lover of Christ prays that her Beloved would make haste to come back in the power of His resurrection. This the imagery of the gazelle or young hart. This speaks of the power of Christ's resurrection.
The "mountains of spices" relates to Christ setting up His kingdom on the earth in His Second Coming. These sweet realms of His kingdom will fill the whole earth (Rev. 11:15; Dan. 5:35)
That seems like a massive leap to come to that conclusion, especially when no one, including Jesus himself, makes mention of the Song of Songs. If what you are saying is true, it makes Revelation look crystal clear and completely unambiguous.
Whenever a male is speaking, is it representative of Jesus (the Bridegroom) is speaking to his Bride? Is whenever a female speaking, it is the Bride (us) speaking to the Bridegroom (Jesus)?
“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo
™ Version 4.2