"Sharp's Rule", a valid "Rule"?

               "Sharp's Rule", a valid "Rule"?

Is Sharp’s Rule a Valid Rule?

For Trinitarians and Modalist Oneness believers!

In 1798 CE amateur scholar, Granville Sharp made a study of the NT and seemed to notice that a pattern was seemingly re-occurring in which the deity of Jesus was being confirmed, in his mind he came to the conclusion, that when two nouns (substantives) of the same grammatical form i.e. case endings and both nouns are connected by the term “kai” (and) and the first noun having the definite article attached to it, but lacking in the second noun, then the two substantives (nouns) are pertaining to the same thing.

The purpose of this paper, is to validate or invalidate the “Rule” that came to be known as “Sharp’s Rule” the rule sets out to prove the deity of Christ and that therefore, Christ is actually “God”, part of a Triune “Godhead”! Sharp himself was a Trinitarian and many Trinitarians have appealed to his “Rule” in support of Trinitarian dogma and that according to the Trinitarians, the scriptures fully support the deity of Jesus Christ and that Sharp found in the NT texts that seemed to support his own findings.

Sharp pointed out that his Rule was not applicable to personal names, only to personal titles; Sharp’s Rule also does not work with forms that have plural personal titles. I will use the Trinitarian bible the NASB (1963 and 1995 Editions) and the NWT used by Jehovah’s Witnesses, who claim that Sharp’s Rule is not a valid Rule, so we have two opposing views on the matter of Sharp’s Rule, only one view can be correct!

Trinitarians

I will start with the view that the Trinitarian view of Sharp’s Rule is the correct one and see if there are texts that match Sharp’s Rule, Two popular texts that are used by Trinitarians in order to make Sharp’s Rule valid is Tit 2:13 and 2 Pet 1:1, so that will be the starting point for this inquiry!

Tit 2:13

Original Greek

“προσδεχόμενοι τὴν μακαρίαν ἐλπίδα καὶ ἐπιφάνειαν τῆς δόξης τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ,”

“looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,” NASB

“while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus,” NWT

In Tit 2:13 that pertinent part we need to look at is:

“…τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ,”

Transliterated: “…of the great God and saviour of us Christ Jesus”

“…of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,” NASB

“…of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus,” NWT

It would seem at first glance that analyzing Tit 2:13 that there is indeed the proof that he was looking for and seemed to have found, as we see in Tit 2:13; “…τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ” here we see two nouns (substantives) the first has the article the second does not have the article, so that we would have “…of our great God (theou = of the God = noun with article) and Savior (noun without article), Christ Jesus” NASB Here we see that “theou” (God) and “Christou Iesou” (Christ Jesus) have the same form i.e. case ending i.e. “ou”. All the evidence so far points to Sharp having a valid Rule!

2 Pet 1:1

Original Greek

“Σίμων Πέτρος δοῦλος καὶ ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῖς ἰσότιμον ἡμῖν λαχοῦσιν πίστιν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,”

“Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:” NASB

“Simon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have obtained a faith, held in equal privilege with ours, by the righteousness of our God and [the] Savior Jesus Christ:” NWT

Again the pertinent part we are looking at is:

“…τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,”

“…of the God of us and saviour Jesus Christ,”

And again, as in Titus 2:13 we see that first noun carries the article, whereas, the second noun does not and they have exactly the same case ending “ou”.

So by using the above texts, they would seem to confirm, that Granville Sharp was correct, so at this point it would seem that the Trinitarians view is correct and that the scriptures do testify to Christ’s deity, therefore, “God”!

Jehovah’s Witnesses

I will now start with this view, that the JW (from now on) view, that Sharp’s Rule is incorrect and therefore, not a valid Rule and that Sharp concocted his Rule, because of biased Trinitarian theology and that when he came across certain texts that might seem to support his Rule, he at the same time ignored texts that nullified his supposed Rule and that he ignored the broader picture of things!

Tit 2:13 “…τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ,”

In Tit 2:13 that pertinent part we need to look at is;

“…τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ,”

Transliterated: “…of the great God and saviour of us Christ Jesus”

“…of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,” NASB

“…of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus,” NWT

2 Thess 1:12

Original Greek

“ὅπως ἐνδοξάσθη τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.”

Pertinent part:

“…τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.”

“so that the name of our Lord Jesus will be glorified in you, and you in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.” NASB

“in order that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in YOU, and YOU in union with him, in accord with the undeserved kindness of our God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.” NWT

“…of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.” NASB

“…of our God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.” NWT

JWs

Here is the bias of Sharp and other Trinitarians, as they overlook the empirical data!

Tit 2:13 “…τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ,”

2 Thess 1:12 “…“…τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.”

Here is the example of Trinitarian bias and blindness to the indisputable facts of grammar!

In Tit 2:13 and in 2 Thess 1:12 the form of the case endings “ou” do not change in both texts they are an exact match, notice how the two are to be read:

2 Thess 1:12 “ of the God of us and of the Christ Jesus”

Tit 2:13 “of the great God and saviour of us of the Christ Jesus”

Let’s insert the original Greek (genitive) terms:

2 Thess 1:12 “of the God (theou) of us and of the Christ Jesus (Christou Iesou)”

Tit 2:13 “of the great God (megalou theou) and saviour of us of the Christ Jesus (Iesou Christou)”

Sharp and other Trinitarians since, spotted the above and did absolutely nothing about it, all they have done since the time of Sharp is to let the concocted Rule freewheel, yet Trinitarian translations (their translators) in 2 Thess 1:12 recognise what the original Greek (in its genitive form) is saying in 2 Thess 1:12 and they therefore, insert the definite article “the” just before “Kuriou” (Lord) which is itself in the genitive form “ou”, there should be not difference between 2 Thess 1:12 use of the article and there should be no reason why it should not be in Tit 2:13, but biased translators have shot themselves in the foot and been caught in their own trap and the NWT is fully justified in inserting the definite article “the” [the] at Tit 2:13, as the original Greek fully supports such an insertion ““…of the great God and of [the] Savior of us, Christ Jesus,” NWT There is no difference between 2 Thess 112 and Tit 2:13”

Under close examination, Sharp’s Rule is not a Rule at all, it falls apart and all it took was one simple little text to expose such and yet, even Trinitarian scholars, who know what is going on or choose to go blind propagate Sharp as having a valid Rule, but it is an invalid non existent concocted Rule, invented to prop up theological bias and nothing more!

2 Pet 1:1

Original Greek

“Σίμων Πέτρος δοῦλος καὶ ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῖς ἰσότιμον ἡμῖν λαχοῦσιν πίστιν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,”

“Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:” NASB

“Simon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have obtained a faith, held in equal privilege with ours, by the righteousness of our God and [the] Savior Jesus Christ:” NWT

Again the pertinent part we are looking at is:

“…τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,”

“…of the God of us and saviour of the Jesus Christ,”

“…of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ:” NASB

“…of our God and [the] Savior Jesus Christ:” NWT

And again, as in Titus 2:13 and 2 Thess 1:12 we see that first noun carries the article, whereas, the second noun does not and they have exactly the same case ending “ou” and such again, as in the other text is in the genitive (of) form!

Why Trinitarians avoid quoting 2 Pet 1:2?

As in the above, let us compare 2 Pet 1:1 with 2 Pet 1:2 as Peter could have said the two verses in one breath!

2 Pet 1:2

Original Greek

“χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη πληθυνθείη ἐν ἐπιγνώσει τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν.”

“Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord;” NASB

“May undeserved kindness and peace be increased to YOU by an accurate knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord,” NWT

The pertinent part of 2 Pet 1:2

“…τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν.”

“…τοῦ θεοῦ (of the God) καὶ (and) Ἰησοῦ (of the Jesus) τοῦ κυρίου (of the Lord) ἡμῶν (of us).”

The pertinent part of 2 Pet 1:1

“…τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,”

“..τοῦ θεοῦ (of the God) ἡμῶν (of us) καὶ (and) σωτῆρος (saviour) Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (of the Jesus Christ),”

As with 2 Thess 1:12 and Tit 2:13, so it is exactly the same with 2 Pet 1:2 and 2 Pet 1:1 the first noun carries the article the second noun does not carry the article, yet we see that in 2 Thess 1:12 and 2 Pet 1:2 a clear distinction is made between two persons, yet under the exact same grammatical constraints Trinitarians abandon the same rule of Greek grammar when they come to Tit 2:13 and 2 Pet 1:1 and they disregard the distinction between the persons and merge the two as though the structure of the text is talking about only one! It would be highly unlikely that Peter and Paul after making clear distinctions of the persons, would then step back from their habitual use of language and begin separating the “of the God” and “of the Jesus Christ” and treat such as though talking about one person, the fact is they never did and the empirical proof is to be seen above!

Take a look at 2 Pet 1:1, 2 again and then ask yourself, is it likely that Peter, when distinguishing the two persons in v2, would have forgotten that he had just merged them into one in v1 and that in v1 he was talking about one person and in the same breath separated this one into two and what about Paul will we say the same for him!

No, if Sharp’s Rule is a rule, then it was only for Granville Sharp and no one else, no sooner had Sharp brought out his phantom Rule than it was criticised by his contemporaries, several Trinitarian themselves, as they could see what Sharp did not want to see, refused to see…!

And it would seem that Trinitarians need to explain certain matters, especially their Trinitarian translators!

There are translations that translate the same way the NWT translates Tit 2:13 NAB, Moffatt, J. B. Phillips, and several others, and one could ask, what was it these scholars saw, that Sharp could not see or more to the point, didn’t want to see…!

Below is an extract taken from the NWT 1984 Ref. Ed. (pages 1581-1582)

"In this place we find two nouns connected by καί (kai, “and”), the first noun being preceded by the definite article τοῦ (tou, “of the”) and the second noun without the definite article. A similar construction is found in 2Pe 1:1, 2, where, in vs 2, a clear distinction is made between God and Jesus. This indicates that when two distinct persons are connected by καί, if the first person is preceded by the definite article it is not necessary to repeat the definite article before the second person. Examples of this construction in the Greek text are found in Ac 13:50; 15:22; Eph 5:5; 2Th 1:12; 1Ti 5:21; 6:13; 2Ti 4:1. This construction is also found in LXX. (See Pr 24:21 ftn.) According to An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, by C. F. D. Moule, Cambridge, England, 1971, p. 109, the sense “of the great God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ . . . is possible in κοινή [koi•ne′] Greek even without the repetition [of the definite article].”

A detailed study of the construction in Tit 2:13 is found in The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays, by Ezra Abbot, Boston, 1888, pp. 439-457. On p. 452 of this work the following comments are found: “Take an example from the New Testament. In Matt. xxi. 12 we read that Jesus ‘cast out all those that were selling and buying in the temple,’ τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ ἀγοράζοντας [tous po•loun′tas kai a•go•ra′zon•tas]. No one can reasonably suppose that the same persons are here described as both selling and buying. In Mark the two classes are made distinct by the insertion of τούς before ἀγοράζοντας; here it is safely left to the intelligence of the reader to distinguish them. In the case before us [Tit 2:13], the omission of the article before σωτῆρος [so•te′ros] seems to me to present no difficulty,—not because σωτῆρος is made sufficiently definite by the addition of ἡμῶν [he•mon′] (Winer), for, since God as well as Christ is often called “our Saviour,” ἡ δόξα τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν [he do′xa tou me•ga′lou The•ou′ kai so•te′ros he•mon′], standing alone, would most naturally be understood of one subject, namely, God, the Father; but the addition of Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ to σωτῆρος ἡμῶν [I•e•sou′ Khri•stou′ to so•te′ros he•mon′] changes the case entirely, restricting the σωτῆρος ἡμῶν to a person or being who, according to Paul’s habitual use of language, is distinguished from the person or being whom he designates as ὁ θεός [ho The•os′], so that there was no need of the repetition of the article to prevent ambiguity. So in 2 Thess. i. 12, the expression κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου [ka•ta′ ten kha′rin tou The•ou′ he•mon′ kai ky•ri′ou] would naturally be understood of one subject, and the article would be required before κυρίου if two were intended; but the simple addition of Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ to κυρίου [I•e•sou′ Khri•stou′ to ky•ri′ou] makes the reference to the two distinct subjects clear without the insertion of the article.”

Therefore, in Tit 2:13, two distinct persons, Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, are mentioned. Throughout the Holy Scriptures it is not possible to identify Jehovah and Jesus as being the same individual.”

NB,

The use of “hemon” [of us /our] only serves to intensify the separation of the persons and notice how Trinitarians shift the position of “hemon” [of us/our] in Tit 2:13, away from Christ and place it just before “God”, thus serving the Trinitarian purpose to de-intensify the separation of the persons…!

In conclusion

The so-called Sharp’s Rule has been thoroughly discredited and those who continue to propagate it , as a “Rule” have some explaining to do!