The Song of Songs actually isn't the best example of the problem, since it declares at the outset that it's a song, and it's clear within the text that its literal, factual content is practically beside the point.
The problem is with things like the Book of Revelation, which is explicitly a dream experienced by John of Patmos in which the world more or less comes to an end. The role of dreams in the Bible is tricky, because they're generally revelations of some true, upcoming event, but told in symbolic language.
In the Old Testament, Joseph's big feat is interpreting the Pharaoh's dreams that warned of famine, and Daniel's parallel feat was interpreting a dream of the King of Babylon. These are explicitly symbolic, and the feat of interpreting these symbols (fat cows for Joseph, a funny statue for Daniel) leads to prosperous new beginnings for the Israelites.
So in something like Revelation, we get a dream without an interpretation. There are a few sub-interpretations within it (yes, symbols are used to represent other symbols), but overall, it leaves it up to the reader to interpret. When Revelation discusses a "lamb-like beast" or a woman riding a creature with 10 heads, it's really up to the reader to decide if this is literally a thing that is small and woolly and a lady on a giant deformed dinosaur, or a wicked person with Christ-like characteristics and a powerful religious organization controlling some kind of bureaucracy with 10 parts, or if it's a kind of allegory for elements of human consciousness or some other kind of thing.
There are similar problems in other books, when it's hard to tell how personal or historical a specific parable is meant to be taken, or how meaningful a description of a prophet's vision of flying wheels is meant to be - a symbol? A literal apparition? A literary device?
And then, once you start spotting literary devices in what seem like histories.... |
