Jesus—Rose of Sharon by Kyle Butt, M.A.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=842

Jesus—Rose of Sharon

by	Kyle Butt, M.A.

The song leader stands before the congregation and announces the number of the next hymn he wants the audience to sing. As you turn the pages, you quickly realize that the song is a familiar old favorite—“Jesus, Rose of Sharon.” But if you are anything like most of the people who sing this song, you probably do not know what the term “rose of Sharon” means. So, what does it mean?

This may come as something of a shock, but the term is used only once in the entire Bible, and in that instance it does not refer to Jesus. In Song of Solomon 2:1, Solomon’s beloved Shulamite bride referred to herself as the “rose of Sharon.” From her description, we can conclude that it is a complimentary term intended to express a certain beauty that the people of Solomon’s day would have recognized.

The word “Sharon” (sometimes spelled Saron) means a level place or plain. The Bible uses the term to describe one of the largest valley plains in all of Palestine. The term is found in numerous verses, including Acts 9:35, 1 Chronicles 5:16, and 1 Chronicles 27:29. If you were to examine a map of Palestine (the maps in the backs of most Bibles should suffice), you could locate this valley by finding the city of Joppa on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. Joppa, and the Aijalon section to its southwest, were the approximate southern borders of the valley. It extended west from the Mediterranean Sea for about 10-15 miles, and north for about 30 miles. Topographical maps distinctly show this region to be a low valley bordered by higher mountains.

From all indications, the Sharon valley was a wild, fertile plain that was the home to a host of beautiful flowers. Isaiah 35:2 lists Sharon in a context discussing blooming vegetation, and describes the valley as “excellent” (NKJV). Sharon was renowned for its majesty and beauty. But what about its “rose”?

A true rose, like the one sweethearts exchange on Valentine’s Day, probably is not a good candidate for the flower described as the “rose of Sharon,” the primary reason being that these flowers are uncommon in Palestine. In fact, although no one can say for certain which flower is the actual “rose of Sharon,” many scholars think the best guess is the cistus or rock-rose. The cistus blooms in various parts of Palestine, and is well known for its soothing aroma and pain-relieving qualities.

When and why the title “Rose of Sharon” was given to Jesus is rather vague. But at least two reasons as to why it might have been assigned to our Lord seem fairly clear. First, Jesus Christ is the pinnacle of beauty and splendor. Of course, His earthly body could not boast of such attributes (Isaiah 53:2), but His spiritual beauty and majesty remain unsurpassed by any created being in Heaven or on Earth (2 Peter 1:16). Second, Christ’s healing powers and pain-relieving actions find a definite point of comparison with those of the rock-rose. Is it any wonder that the “Great Physician,” Who came to heal those who were physically ill as well as those who were spiritually sick, should be given the name of a flower known for its sweet aroma and soothing medicinal qualities?

Although the Holy Spirit never chose to inspire the Bible writers to refer to Jesus as the “Rose of Sharon,” it nevertheless is a name we can employ to speak of the majesty, beauty, and healing power of our Lord.

From Mark Copeland... "CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS" Manuscript Attestation For The New Testament

                          "CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS"

               Manuscript Attestation For The New Testament

INTRODUCTION

1. In an effort to demonstrate the RELIABILITY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT    AS
   A HISTORICAL DOCUMENT...
   a. We considered evidence which confirms that the 

      New Testament was
      WRITTEN AND BEING CIRCULATED SOON AFTER THE EVENTS TOOK PLACE;
      e.g.:
      1) The internal evidence
      2) Papyri fragments
      3) Patristic writings
   b. We noted that ARCHAEOLOGY CONFIRMS THE NEW TESTAMENT RECORD (as
      we have it today) in those areas which can be checked; e.g., references to:
      1) People
      2) Places
      3) Events

2. But ONE MORE QUESTION REMAINS in order to establish beyond a
   reasonable doubt the historical reliability of the New Testament:

   "What assurance is there, that what we have today in the form of
   the New Testament, is that which was penned by its original authors?"

3. In other words, since we don't have the original "AUTOGRAPHS" (the
   manuscripts penned by the authors), how do we know...
   a. There hasn't been SIGNIFICANT CHANGES OR ERRORS made in the
      process of copying over the years?
   b. There hasn't been COLLUSION (secret cooperation for deceitful
      purposes) among those who possessed the early copies of the originals?

4. This is where "THE BIBLIOGRAPHICAL TEST" in attesting ancient
   manuscripts can be applied to help answer such questions!

[The answer this "test" gives to the historical reliability of the New
Testament is an amazing one!  But first, it may help to briefly explain...]

I. THE "BIBLIOGRAPHICAL TEST"

   A. THIS TEST IS APPLIED TO ALL ANCIENT HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS...
      1. Such as:
         a) Julius Caesar's "Gallic War"
         b) "Histories" of Tacitus
         c) "Annals" of Tacitus
         d) The New Testament
      2. In an effort TO ESTABLISH THE LIKELIHOOD THAT WHAT COPIES WE HAVE:
         a) Are faithful representatives of the originals
         b) And have come to us free of changes, errors, or collusion

   B. QUESTIONS RAISED IN THIS TEST...
      1. "How many copies of the document in question are available?"
         a. In order to compare them with one another
         b. The more, the better
      2. "Where were the copies found?"
         a. If they all came from one place, collusion is possible
         b. But if they are from places far removed by time and location,
            collusion is unlikely
      3. "What length of time passed between the original and the earliest copies?"
         a. If the earliest copies we have were written hundreds of years
            after the original, a lot of changes could have been made and
            we would not know it
         b. But a short interval of time would increase our assurance in
            the reliability of the copies
      4. "What variances exist between the copies?"
         a. If the copies of a document are filled with significant
            differences, then it would not be possible to know what the
            original author wrote!
         b. But if the variances are few and minor, then the process of
            copying over the years has been faithful to the original!

[What answers do we find when these questions are applied to the New 
Testament?  And how does the New Testament compare with other 
historical documents of antiquity?]

II. THE "BIBLIOGRAPHICAL TEST" FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT

   A. HOW MANY COPIES OF NEW TESTAMENT MANUSCRIPTS ARE AVAILABLE?
      1. Over 4,000 Greek manuscripts; 13,000 copies of portions of the
         New Testament in Greek!
      2. Compare this with other ancient historical writings:
         a. Caesar's "Gallic Wars" - only 10 Greek manuscripts
         b. "Annals" of Tacitus - 2
         c. Livy - 20; Plato - 7; Sophocles - 100

   B. WHERE WERE THESE COPIES FOUND?
      1. Various places:  Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Turkey, Greece, Italy
      2. Such varied locations would make COLLUSION very difficult

   C. WHAT LENGTH OF TIME PASSED BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL AND THE EARLIEST COPIES?
      1. We saw in the previous lesson that several PAPYRI FRAGMENTS
         have been dated to within 50-100 years
      2. We have several nearly complete New Testament GREEK MANUSCRIPTS
         which were copied within 300-400 years, for example:
         a. Codex Sinaiticus, found near Mt. Sinai
         b. Codex Alexandrinus, found near Alexandria in Egypt
         c. Codex Vaticanus, located at the Vatican in Rome
      3. But COMPARE THIS WITH MANUSCRIPTS OF VARIOUS CLASSICAL HISTORIES:
         a. "Histories of Thucydides" - earliest copy is 1300 years
            removed from the original
         b. "Histories of Herodotus" - earliest copy is 1350 years
            removed from the original
         c. Caesar's "Gallic War" - 950 years
         d. Roman History of Livy - 350 years (and the earliest copy is only a fragment)
         e. "Histories" of Tacitus - 750 years
         f. "Annals" of Tacitus - 950 years (and there are only two manuscripts)

   D. WHAT VARIANCES EXIST BETWEEN THE COPIES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT?
      1. It is true that there are SOME VARIATIONS between the many
         thousands of manuscripts available
         a. But the vast majority are very minor (spelling, differences
            in phraseology, etc.; modern translations often note the
            differences in footnotes)
         b. Only 1/2 of one percent is in question (compared to 5
            percent for the Illiad)
      2. Even then, it can be stated:  "No fundamental doctrine of the
         Christian faith rests on a disputed reading...It cannot be too
         strongly asserted that in substance the text of the Bible is
         certain:  especially is this the case with the New Testament."
         -- SIR FREDERICK KENYON (authority in the field of New
         Testament textual criticism)

CONCLUSION

1. In regards to the "BIBLIOGRAPHICAL TEST" in attesting the manuscript
   evidence for the New Testament:
   a. The New Testament not only passes with flying colors...
   b. It does better than ANY other historical document come down to
      us from antiquity!

2. "The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater
   than the evidence for many writings of classical authors, the
   authenticity of which no one dreams of questioning.  And if the New
   Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity
   would generally be as beyond all doubt." -- F. F. BRUCE

3. JOSH MCDOWELL makes some interesting comments:

   "After trying to shatter the historicity and validity of the
   Scripture, I came to the conclusion that they are historically
   trustworthy. If one discards the Bible as being unreliable, then he
   must discard almost all literature of antiquity."

   "One problem I constantly face is the desire on the part of many to
   apply one standard or test to secular literature and other to the
   Bible.  One needs to apply the same test, whether the literature
   under investigation is secular or religious."

   "Having done this, I believe one can hold the Scriptures in his
   hand and say, 'The Bible is trustworthy, and historically reliable.'"

4. Why then would anyone question the New Testament record concerning Jesus?
   a. It is because reference is made to miracles, such as the
      resurrection of Jesus from the dead
   b. In our next study, we shall consider whether it is reasonable to
      believe that the New Testament is a LIE when it speaks of such
      things...

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

 

From Gary... Dangerous curves ahead

Over the past few years, Linda and I have acquired the habit of saying "drive carefully" if the other one of us is going to take our vehicle out alone..  Having been in a few accidents over my lifetime, I can tell you that the cumulative effects of auto injuries increases over the years. So, this little exhortation before leaving helps- because, who really wants to get hurt, anyway?   Now, this picture of a pass in Switzerland looks dangerous, but there is a surprise to it. But first, think about the world we live in. Many things can happen to us; accidents, divorce, bankruptcy, arguments, illnesses of all kinds, etc.. However, while some of these things happen at random, most do not. My point is found in this Scripture...

Jeremiah, Chapter 10 (WEB)

23 Yahweh, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man who walks to direct his steps.  24 Yahweh, correct me, but in measure: not in your anger, lest you bring me to nothing.

Therefore, be careful out there and realize you are not alone- God is there!!!

And as far as that surprise goes....

The architect of the roadway knew of the dangers of this road and had phosphorescent paint placed in the boundary line paint.  I deliberately darkened the picture to simulate dusk and therefore show this feature.

When your life becomes dark and dreary, remember God's word- it will help you to "drive safely" amid the curves of life!!!