Integrity Syndicate | Addressing The Grandville Sharp Rule, Post Debate Discussion with Dale Tuggy @IntegritySyndicate | Uploaded July 2022 | Updated October 2024, 11 hours ago.
Dr. Dale Tuggy addresses the Grandville Sharp rule, which Dr. Craig used against him in his recent discussion on Trinitarianism vs Unitarianism.
Much Thanks to Dr. Tuggy! To those not familiar with Sharps Rule, the discussion is in reference to two Trinitarian "proof Texts" as follows:
Titus 2.13 (ESV): waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
2 Peter 1.1 (ESV): Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:
The Granville Sharp Rule says that when two singular common nouns are used to describe a person, and those two nouns are joined by an additive conjunction, and the definite article precedes the first noun but not the second, then both nouns refer to the same person.
This "rule" is super contentious and widely rejected
Sharps rule does not hold up to closer scrutiny
It doesn't work with names, only with titles. (not Titus 2:4)
But also doesn’t work with plurals (Daniel Wallace)
The grammar with plurals can (1) indicate two separate groups (2) Two overlapping groups (3) Two groups with one being a subset of the other or (4) Two identical groups
The grammatical construction has the effect like a single notion
Example 1: generals and captains
Example 2: largest and smallest fleets
Being combined they comprise a larger whole but remain distinct things but Not identifying the things as one and the same thing. The things work together as a broader unified whole.
It is clearly Not an Iron Clad Rule
Exceptions to the rule:
1. Doesn’t apply to names of substances considered as substances
2. Doesn’t apply to proper names
3. Doesn’t’ apply to noun that the are the names of abstract ideas
4. Doesn’t’ apply if the nouns are plurals
5. Doesn’t apply where the attributives are in their nature are incompatible, i.e. where the application of the rule would result in a contradiction in terms. The clarity of the passage need not result in the rule being observed
Comparing the rule with its exceptions and limitations...
It in fact results in nothing more than this…
General guidelines are to be followed using the article…
Except when this fact is sufficiently determined by some other circumstance…
The principle of exception just stated… is perfectly reasonable, when from any other circumstance, it could be clearly understood that different persons or things are spoken than the insertion or omission of the article is a matter of indifference.
Normal use of the definite article is to add a the additional article when two distinct things are being spoken of.
However, sometimes it is just a clear background assumption that the A and the B are one and the same or the A and B are distinct from each other. In the case where the two are clearly distinct, there is no need to add the definite article.
Again, if there is a clear assumption that the two are distinct from each other, it is not necessary to add the definite article
Both NT authors in the context make a distinction in surrounding verses:
Titus 1.4, 2.13 (ESV)
4 To Titus my natural son according to the common faith, Grace, mercy, and peace **from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ our Savior**. 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and appearing of that glory of that mighty God, and of our Savior Jesus Christ
2 Peter 1.1-2 (ESV) 1 Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: 2 May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge **of God and of Jesus our Lord**.
The punctuation of the ESV is wrong in light of the context
Greek is flexible and no argument for the deity of Christ can be deduced from these texts
See also Trinities Podcast 351 – Thoughts on my Dialogue with Craig on the Trinity and the Bible – Part 2
trinities.org/blog/podcast-351-thoughts-on-my-dialogue-with-craig-on-the-trinity-and-the-bible-part-2
Here is the article from Dale mentioned from Daniel Wallace:
bible.org/article/granville-sharp-model-evangelical-scholarship-and-social-activism
Join us at the Unitarian Christian Alliance Conference
unitarianchristianalliance.org
Want to discuss further? Or just fellowship with others? Join the Integrity Syndicate Discord: discord.gg/wM7HtbeQeX
integritysyndicate.com – For the restoration of 1st century Apostolic Christianity
trueunitarian.com - The foundations of Biblical Unitarianism
Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.
#IntegritySyndicate
Dr. Dale Tuggy addresses the Grandville Sharp rule, which Dr. Craig used against him in his recent discussion on Trinitarianism vs Unitarianism.
Much Thanks to Dr. Tuggy! To those not familiar with Sharps Rule, the discussion is in reference to two Trinitarian "proof Texts" as follows:
Titus 2.13 (ESV): waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
2 Peter 1.1 (ESV): Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:
The Granville Sharp Rule says that when two singular common nouns are used to describe a person, and those two nouns are joined by an additive conjunction, and the definite article precedes the first noun but not the second, then both nouns refer to the same person.
This "rule" is super contentious and widely rejected
Sharps rule does not hold up to closer scrutiny
It doesn't work with names, only with titles. (not Titus 2:4)
But also doesn’t work with plurals (Daniel Wallace)
The grammar with plurals can (1) indicate two separate groups (2) Two overlapping groups (3) Two groups with one being a subset of the other or (4) Two identical groups
The grammatical construction has the effect like a single notion
Example 1: generals and captains
Example 2: largest and smallest fleets
Being combined they comprise a larger whole but remain distinct things but Not identifying the things as one and the same thing. The things work together as a broader unified whole.
It is clearly Not an Iron Clad Rule
Exceptions to the rule:
1. Doesn’t apply to names of substances considered as substances
2. Doesn’t apply to proper names
3. Doesn’t’ apply to noun that the are the names of abstract ideas
4. Doesn’t’ apply if the nouns are plurals
5. Doesn’t apply where the attributives are in their nature are incompatible, i.e. where the application of the rule would result in a contradiction in terms. The clarity of the passage need not result in the rule being observed
Comparing the rule with its exceptions and limitations...
It in fact results in nothing more than this…
General guidelines are to be followed using the article…
Except when this fact is sufficiently determined by some other circumstance…
The principle of exception just stated… is perfectly reasonable, when from any other circumstance, it could be clearly understood that different persons or things are spoken than the insertion or omission of the article is a matter of indifference.
Normal use of the definite article is to add a the additional article when two distinct things are being spoken of.
However, sometimes it is just a clear background assumption that the A and the B are one and the same or the A and B are distinct from each other. In the case where the two are clearly distinct, there is no need to add the definite article.
Again, if there is a clear assumption that the two are distinct from each other, it is not necessary to add the definite article
Both NT authors in the context make a distinction in surrounding verses:
Titus 1.4, 2.13 (ESV)
4 To Titus my natural son according to the common faith, Grace, mercy, and peace **from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ our Savior**. 13 Looking for that blessed hope, and appearing of that glory of that mighty God, and of our Savior Jesus Christ
2 Peter 1.1-2 (ESV) 1 Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: 2 May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge **of God and of Jesus our Lord**.
The punctuation of the ESV is wrong in light of the context
Greek is flexible and no argument for the deity of Christ can be deduced from these texts
See also Trinities Podcast 351 – Thoughts on my Dialogue with Craig on the Trinity and the Bible – Part 2
trinities.org/blog/podcast-351-thoughts-on-my-dialogue-with-craig-on-the-trinity-and-the-bible-part-2
Here is the article from Dale mentioned from Daniel Wallace:
bible.org/article/granville-sharp-model-evangelical-scholarship-and-social-activism
Join us at the Unitarian Christian Alliance Conference
unitarianchristianalliance.org
Want to discuss further? Or just fellowship with others? Join the Integrity Syndicate Discord: discord.gg/wM7HtbeQeX
integritysyndicate.com – For the restoration of 1st century Apostolic Christianity
trueunitarian.com - The foundations of Biblical Unitarianism
Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research.
#IntegritySyndicate
