[B-Greek] Titus 2:13
Harold Holmyard
hholmyard at ont.com
Mon Aug 14 17:08:49 EDT 2006
Dear Bill,
>Perhaps there is some characteristic of the genitive with which I am not
>familiar that makes it obvious that TOU MEGALOU THEOU intends "the
>great god." Please advise. In my present understanding of the genitive, the
>construction reads "the great [one] of god." I mean, does hUIOU THEOU
>(Romans 1:4) mean "the son god?"
>
>
HH: hUIOS is a noun, but MEGAS is an adjective meaning "great," and the
natural expectation is that the adjective will modify the noun with
which it stands and with which it agrees in number, gender, and case. Of
course it can be nominalized, but one expects the context and grammar to
clarify that such a nominalization is present, since otherwise the
construction would be naturally taken as an adjective modifying its
noun. The words as they stand would suggest the normal reading of "great
God," and the context does not suggest a special nominalization.
>This issue obviates discussion of GS.
>
>
HH: I don't know what you mean about obviating discussion of Granville
Sharp, if that is what you mean. For even if the words meant "the great
one of God," they would still apply to Jesus, and the Granville Sharp
rule would still be applicable. Just go to commentaries on this passage.
I have never read anyone claim that the words mean "the great one of
God." Sure words can mean all kinds of things, but that is evidently not
what is intended. Here is the comment on these words in the NET Bible:
tn The terms “God and Savior” both refer to the same person, Jesus
Christ. This is one of the clearest statements in the NT concerning the
deity of Christ. The construction in Greek is known as the Granville
Sharp rule, named after the English philanthropist-linguist who first
clearly articulated the rule in 1798. Sharp pointed out that in the
construction article-noun-καί-noun (where καί [kai] = “and”), when two
nouns are singular, personal, and common (i.e., not proper names), they
always had the same referent. Illustrations such as “the friend and
brother,” “the God and Father,” etc. abound in the NT to prove Sharp’s
point. The only issue is whether terms such as “God” and “Savior” could
be considered common nouns as opposed to proper names. Sharp and others
who followed (such as T. F. Middleton in his masterful The Doctrine of
the Greek Article) demonstrated that a proper name in Greek was one that
could not be pluralized. Since both “God” (θεός, qeos) and “savior”
(σωτήρ, swthr) were occasionally found in the plural, they did not
constitute proper names, and hence, do fit Sharp’s rule. Although there
have been 200 years of attempts to dislodge Sharp’s rule, all attempts
have been futile. Sharp’s rule stands vindicated after all the dust has
settled. For more information on Sharp’s rule see ExSyn 270-78, esp.
276. See also 2 Pet 1:1 and Jude 4.
Yours,
Harold Holmyard
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list