Praying to the Father or Jesus?

[Steven Avery]

Sharp's nonsense has a boatload of exceptions, it is a logical joke.
Special pleading to a high art. (You should be able to discern that as you wrote, or cut-and-paste, or the blah blah.)

Sharp did not really know Greek, and apparently plagiarized a French writer to come up with his constructs.

Most of the verses he claimed should be changed under his rules were laughed out of Bible text court.

Ironically, one of the exceptions was called "naive modalism" in writings by early church writers.

You have been played.

(The best info was on a CARM forum, however they all crashed, so I can try to help a bit, there is some on a b-Greek forum that is actually pretty good.)

Here is a simple question for you.
How come Granville Sharp did not even know how to implement his own rule?

Steven

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I don’t have a problem saying that I use both when I address God - either God or Jesus.

However, I do have a problem if someone, like yourself, says that they “Now, I pray very much, intentionally, to both...”

Praying “to both” indicates to me that you view God and Jesus as two separate entities. That can’t be true as Thomas would say, “My Lord and my God.”

It is clear to me that the Apostles always had in view the work that God had done - manifest in flesh. Therefore, I pray to one intentionally.

You don't suppose you are misunderstanding Thomas' statement in light of the rest of the Gospel of John?

You might also ask yourself whether or not Paul and the other Apostles had in mind the idea that God was manifest in the flesh (meaning working outwardly from within the human, Jesus of Nazareth), or God was manifested as the flesh (meaning becoming and acting as the human, Jesus of Nazareth).

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

The doctrine of Christ is that Christ IS BOTH the Father and the Son. In Christ we have BOTH.

Isaiah 9:6-7

Correct, we do have BOTH, that is, the Father and the Son, because in Jesus, the Father dwelled.

And Isaiah 9:6 isn't a prooftext for Oneness, for a number of reasons.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

It means the same thing.

Actually, the don't mean the same thing, especially in light of the other uses of the phrase God our Savior in Titus.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Ironically, one of the exceptions was called "naive modalism" in writings by early church writers.

Pure Bible Forum
Granville Sharp Rule for Fools
the naive modalism exception
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index...xception.1508/

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Correct, we do have BOTH, that is, the Father and the Son, because in Jesus, the Father dwelled.

And Isaiah 9:6 isn't a prooftext for Oneness, for a number of reasons.

Why is it not? If the Son is the Mighty God and the Everlasting Father then yes its a great prooftext for Oneness.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Esaias

...I would suggest that if one were to claim the rule is erroneous, then one should be able to provide multiple examples from native Greek that violate the rule. I'd like to see some of those if possible.

Originally Posted by Steven Avery

Sharp's nonsense has a boatload of exceptions, it is a logical joke.
Special pleading to a high art. (You should be able to discern that as you wrote, or cut-and-paste, or the blah blah.)

Sharp did not really know Greek, and apparently plagiarized a French writer to come up with his constructs.

Most of the verses he claimed should be changed under his rules were laughed out of Bible text court.

Ironically, one of the exceptions was called "naive modalism" in writings by early church writers.

You have been played.

(The best info was on a CARM forum, however they all crashed, so I can try to help a bit, there is some on a b-Greek forum that is actually pretty good.)

Here is a simple question for you.
How come Granville Sharp did not even know how to implement his own rule?

Steven

Can you cite some examples where his rule fails?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

You don't suppose you are misunderstanding Thomas' statement in light of the rest of the Gospel of John?

Explain Thomas' tatement.

You might also ask yourself whether or not Paul and the other Apostles had in mind the idea that God was manifest in the flesh (meaning working outwardly from within the human, Jesus of Nazareth), or God was manifested as the flesh (meaning becoming and acting as the human, Jesus of Nazareth).

Explain the difference, in light of John 1:14, please.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Correct, we do have BOTH, that is, the Father and the Son, because in Jesus, the Father dwelled.

If we have Paul then we have the Father?

And Isaiah 9:6 isn't a prooftext for Oneness, for a number of reasons.

If He isn't the mighty God and everlasting Father then He isn't the Prince of peace, either.

[Steven Avery]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Can you cite some examples where his rule fails?

There are multiple versions of "his rule".

And let's put aside for a few minutes the two verses in this thread that are in dispute, and the naive modalism words from early church writers that are said by Granville Sharp rule supporters to contradict the rule.

Let's start with the New Testament claims of Granville Sharp, who wanted to retranslate nine verses from the Authorized Version. (One was an oddball outlier.) Putting aside the outlier and the two under discussion, we end up with six Granville Sharp translation errors.

Remarks on the uses of the definitive article in the Greek text of the New Testament: containing many new proofs of the divinity of Christ, from passages which are wrongly translated in the common English version - (1803) 3rd ed - 148 pg.
https://books.google.com/books?id=J2dLAAAAIAAJ

Including these six.

===========================

Ephesians 5:5 (AV)
For this ye know, that no whoremonger,
nor unclean person,
nor covetous man,
who is an idolater,
hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

Granville Sharp error:
"in the kingdom of (Jesus) the Christ and God” or else to be rendered:
"in the kingdom of Christ, (even) of God"
https://books.google.com/books?id=J2dLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA31

=====

2 Thessalonians 1:12 (AV)
That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you,
and ye in him,
according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Granville Sharp error:
"according to the grace of the God and Lord of us, Jesus Christ" or
"according to the grace of Jesus Christ, our God and Lord"
https://books.google.com/books?id=J2dLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA38

FYI: here Sharp rejects the Alexandrian MS., Codex Alexandrinus, because of a period.

=====

1 Timothy 5:21 (AV)
I charge thee before God,
and the Lord Jesus Christ,
and the elect angels,
that thou observe these things without preferring one before another,
doing nothing by partiality.

Granville Sharp error:
"I charge (thee), before Jesus Christ, the GOD and LORD, and (before) the elect angels..." - (for the TR-AV text)
https://books.google.com/books?id=J2dLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA41

=====

2 Timothy 4:1 (AV)
I charge thee therefore before God,
and the Lord Jesus Christ,
who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

Granville Sharp error:
"I charge (thee,) therefore, before the God and Lord, Jesus Christ, &c." or
"I charge (thee,) therefore, before Jesus Christ, the God and Lord, who shall judge the quick and the dead, &c."
https://books.google.com/books?id=J2dLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA48

===========================

On this next one, Sharp went to the Byzantine Majority conflation corruption, moving away from the AV because he always puts doctrine over consistency. And I doubt if any English translations from the Byzantine editions use his translation mangling.

Acts 20:28 (AV)
Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock,
over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers,
to feed the church of God,
which he hath purchased with his own blood.

So Sharp wanted the translation:

"To feed the church of the Lord, even of God, which he hath purchased with bis own blood.”
https://books.google.com/books?id=J2dLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA27

Instead of what is in the Greek Byzantine Majority:

World English Bible
Take heed, therefore, to yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the assembly of the Lord and God which he purchased with his own blood.
https://biblehub.com/kjv/acts/20-28.htm

===========================

On this next one, the critical text versions have a corruption, let us look simply at the TR-AV verse.

Jude 1:4 (AV)
For there are certain men crept in unawares,
who were before of old ordained to this condemnation,
ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness,
and denying the only Lord God,
and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Granville Sharp supports and error by Henry Hammond (1605-1660),

“our only Master, God, and Lord, Jesus Christ"
https://books.google.com/books?id=J2dLAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA57

and Sharp says this verse grants Jesus the title:
"the only potentate, God"

And later in Young's Literal there is the strange
"and our only Master, God, and Lord -- Jesus Christ -- denying,"

although Sharp is concerned that this, along with the great God of Titus 2:13 in his errant translation, might be too Sabellian! However, per Sharp, if you understand:

"the unquestionable existence of three divine persons in one only divine nature, or Godhead" p. 61

combined with the explanation on p. 65-66, you "will not ... seem to exceed the truth."

===========================

So let us start with these six blunders by Granville Sharp.

(We will skip his Philippians 3:3 blunder.)