Originally Posted by Nang
The elect church of Jesus Christ.
Very sexual terms for the Church, huh?
This requires an allegorical approach to the book. The genre of the book is simply about human love, including marital, sexual love. One could make a remote application to Christ/Church, but this is not the inspired, intended meaning (though you are not alone in your view/theory). The book does not really mention God, salvation, etc., so why go beyond the normative plain sense meaning of a lover and his beloved?
Likewise, Proverbs 8 is a personification of wisdom (she) vs folly, not a Christological reference.
Just because bride imagery is used of the church elsewhere does not mean every mention of human marital relations/sexuality has direct intention to Christ/Church or Israel/YHWH. Context is king. One can read the latter into it, but was this the intention? One also cannot spiritualize verses and apply them to the church when it talks about breasts, etc. Cmon.
Why is this a Calvinistic issue? Likely, Calvinists and Arminians could hold a variety of views about the book. Some Calvinists would agree with me, disagree with me, agree with Nang, disagree with her (same with Arminians, Catholics, Orthodox, Mormons, JWs, Muslims, Jews, etc.).