Re: Sharp's Rule and Quasi-Proper Names

From: McKay family (
Date: Tue Apr 14 1998 - 02:36:10 EDT

Greg Stafford wrote:
[big snip]
 I recommend that
>anyone interested in the G. Sharp issue obtain Wallace's thesis, or at
>his Grammar, and consider what he has to say. Then, to round out your
>understanding, read the Excursus in my book, which contains a consideration
>all relevant literature, including Wallace's thesis, and make up your own

I was interested to find out what Dan Wallace thinks of the use of his work
in Greg Stafford's book "Jehovah's Witnesses Defended" so I wrote to him,
and he has given me permission to quote from his reply to me.

The results of Stafford's method are completely predictable ... He has
selectively quoted from my works, ignoring the accompanying data given in
many places ... His
argument that "Savior Jesus Christ" is a title was dealt with quite
in Murray Harris' Jesus as God, as well as my dissertation, but Stafford
ignores the arguments ...

He fails to note, for example, that (1) no proper names are ever used in the
NT in conformity to the Granville Sharp rule, and (2) THEOS comprises the
largest set of examples that DO fit the Granville Sharp rule...

Further, I do not have to defend either Titus 2:13 or 2 Peter 1:1 as
affirming the deity of Christ; some good scholars whom I respect have done
otherwise. But a lack of affirmation is not a denial...

Stafford supplies ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF that THEOS is ever used in the NT as a
proper noun ... Indeed, the evidence is decidedly against him on this...

David McKay

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:23 EDT