Smart's less contrived than Sharp's
One of the McKays
musicke at ozemail.com.au
Sun Feb 4 21:40:33 EST 2001
Dan, what sources can you cite which see "Saviour Jesus Christ" as a title
of Christ?
> In addition I view it as _very_ contrived to eliminate "Christ"
> and "Lord" from Sharp's rule but not "Savior Jesus Christ."
>
In the 5 instances of this in the NT, it would seem to me that the writer is
not using SWTHR as title:
... THS DOXHS TOU MEGALOU QEOU
KAI SWTHROS hHMWN
IHSOU CRISTOU [Titus 2:13]
...TOU QEOU hHMWN
KAI SWTHROS
IHSOU CRISTOU [2 Peter 1:1]
... TOU KURIOU hHMWN
KAI SWTHROS
IHSOU CRISTOU [2 Peter 1:11]
... TOU KURIOU [hHMWN]
KAI SWTHROS
IHSOU CRISTOU [2 Peter 2:20]
... TOU KURIOU hHMWN
KAI SWTHROS
IHSOU CRISTOU [2 Peter 3:18]
The NT clearly uses the title "Lord Jesus Christ" but I can't see "Saviour
Jesus Christ" as a title.
David McKay
musicke at ozemail.com.au
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list