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. By Granville Sharp, ...

A LETTER TO THE REV. MR — CONCERNING THE USES OF THE GREEK ARTICLE 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Old Jewry, London 10th June, 1778.

DEAR SIR,

WHEN I look upon the date of your last oblig∣ing letter, I am much ashamed that I have so long neglected to acknowledge the receipt of it. The truth is, I began a letter a few days afterwards; but recol∣lecting that I had written on the same subject (viz. the use of the Greek article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and copulative 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) to a very learned friend, at a great distance in the coun∣try, I was willing to wait for his answer, lest it should oblige me to make any alterations in my rules; and so, indeed, it 〈◊〉〈◊〉 proved; for he objected to my first rule (as it was then stated) and has cited several ex∣ceptions to it, which 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thought sufficient to set it entirely aside: but this, I am convinced, is going too far, and would be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 injury to truth. The use there∣fore

which I have made of my friend's objections, has been, to correct my rule, and add to it such li∣mitations as might include the several exceptions, cited by my learned friend, as well as others, that are similar to them.

The waiting for my friend's answer and the neces∣sary corrections in consequence of it, together with a variety of other engagements, has prevented me from complying with your request so soon as I could have wished; but I shall now submit to your consi∣deration and candour, the rules in question; and beg that you will be pleased to favour me with whatever examples may occur in the course of your reading, either as exceptions to invalidate the first rule, or as proofs to establish and confirm it. The reasons of my recommending the first rule more particularly to your attention, is, because it is of much more con∣sequence than any of the rest, as it will enable us (if the truth of it be admitted) to correct the translation of several important texts in the present English ver∣sion of the New Testament, in favour of a fundamen∣tal article of our church, which has, of late, been much opposed and traduced, I mean the belief that our Lord Jesus Christ is truly God.

RULE I.

When the copulative 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 connects two nouns of the same case [viz. nouns (either substantive, or adjective;

or participles) of personal description respecting office, dignity, affinity, or connection, and attributes, properties or qualities good or ill] if the article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or any of it's cases, preceeds the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is ex∣pressed or described by the first noun or participle; i. e. it denotes a further description of the first named person, as—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Matt. xii. 22. And again 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 2 Cor. i. 3. This last sentence contains two examples of the first rule. See also in 2 Cor. xi. 31, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. Also in Eph. vi. 21, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Also in Heb. iii. 1, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. See also in 2 Pet. ii. 20,—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. And again in 2 Pet. iii. 2,—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And again in 2 Pet iii. 18,—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Also in Philippians iv. 20,—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. In Rev. xvi. 15,—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. And in Col. ii. 2,—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, , 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. And in 1 Thef. iii. 11,—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

This solemn ejaculation for the divine direc∣tion is addressed jointly to the God and Father, and to our Lord Jesus ; (so that here is good authority for offering up prayers to Christ, which some have lately opposed) and the distinction of the persons is preserved (as in the last example) by again inserting the article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 before 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which had been omitted before 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. The apostle James also used the same mode of expression—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. James i. 27. And there are at least a do∣zen other places, viz. (Rom. xv. 6.1. Cor. xv. 24. Gal. i. 4. Ephes. v. 20. Col. i. 3, and 12 † and iii. 17. 1 Thes. i. 3. 1 Thes. iii. 13. 2 Thes. ii. 16. James iii. 9. Rev. i. 6.) wherein "the God and Father" is mentioned exactly according to this rule; and there is no exception or instance of the like mode of expression that I know of, which necessarily

requires a construction different from what is here laid down; EXCEPT the nouns be proper names, or in the plural number; in which cases there are many exceptions; though there are not wanting exam∣ples, even of plural nouns, which are expressed ex∣actly agreeable to this rule.

As the examples which I have annexed to my first rule consist of texts, wherein the sense is so plain, that there can be no controversy concerning the par∣ticular persons, to whom the several nouns are ap∣plicable, it will be thought, I hope, that I have al∣ready cited a sufficient number of them to authen∣ticate and justify the rule. There are several other texts wherein the mode of expression is exactly simi∣lar, and which therefore do necessarily require a construction agreeable to the same rule, though the present English verson has unhappily rendered them in a different sense, and has thereby concealed from the mere English reader many striking proofs con∣cerning the Godhead (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Col. ii. 9.) of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. The rules which follow are intended only to illustrate the particula∣rity of the several sentences which fall under the first rule, by shewing in other sentences, the different senses that are occasioned by adding, omiting, or repeating the article as well with the copulative as without it.

RULE, II.

A repetition of the article before the second noun, if the copulative be omitted, will have the same effect and

power: for it also denotes a further description of the same person, property or thing, that is expressed by the first noun; as in the following examples.

—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Luke i. 47.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Luke ii. 26. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, John i. 29. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, John iv. 42.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, John v. 23. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, John vi. 27. This verse contains three examples. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. John xx. 31. —〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉

&c. Heb. xiii. 20. This sentence also contains three examples.

(GENERAL EXCEPTION.)

Except when genitive cases depend on one another in succession, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 2 Cor. iv. 3. And again 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. Colos. ii. 2.

RULE, III.

And the omission of the copulative between two or more nouns (of the same case) of personal description or appli∣cation, even without the article before the second noun, will have the same effect; viz. will denote a further description of the same person, property or thing, that is expressed by the first noun; as in the follow∣ing examples.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Rom. ii. 19, 20.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉Ephes. v. 20, 21. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉&c. Tit. i. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, † 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, 1. Tim. i. 1.

RULE, IV.

Yet it is otherwise when the nouns are not of person∣al description, or application; for then they denote di∣stinct things or qualities, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

1 Tim. i. 2. 2 Tim. i. 2. Titus i. 4. See also 2 John 3, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

RULE, V.

And also when there is no article before the first noun, the insertion of the copulative 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉before the next noun, or name, of the same case, denotes a different person or thing from the first; as in the following examples. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉&c. James i. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Ephes. iv. 31. This last sentence contains four examples of the fifth rule. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 2 Cor. i. 2. 1 Ephes. i. 2. Gal. i. 3. Philem. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Ephes. vi. 23. †

EXCEPT the numerical adjective 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 precedes the first noun, in which case the copulative 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 will have the same effect that it has between two nouns where only the first is preceded by the article, agreeable to the first rule, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Ephes. iv. 6.

RULE VI.

And as the insertion of the copulative 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 between nouns of the same case without articles (according to the fifth rule) denotes that the second noun expresses a different person, thing, or quality from the preced∣ing noun, so likewise, the same effect attends the copu∣lative, when each of the nouns are preceded by articles; as in the following examples.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. John i. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. John ii. 22.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. John xi. 44. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Col. ii. 2.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 2 Tim. i. 5.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 1 Pet. iv. 11.

EXCEPT distinct and different actions are intended to be attributed to one and the same person, in which case if the sentence is not expressed agreeable to the three first rules, but appears as an exception to this sixth rule, or even to the fifth, (for this exception re∣lates to both rules) the context must explain, or point out plainly the person to whom the two nouns relate, as in 1 Thess. iii. 6, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. And also in John xx. 28, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. If the two nouns (viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) were the leading nominative substantives of a sentence, they would express the descriptive qualities or dignities of two distinct persons according to the sixth rule; but, in this last text, two distinct divine characters are applied to one per∣son only; for the context clearly expresses to whom the words were addressed by Thomas; which perspicu∣ity in the address clearly proves, likewise, the futility of that gloss for which the Arians and Socinians contend; viz. that Thomas could not mean that Christ was his God, but only uttered, in his surprize, a solemn exclamation or ejaculation to God. The text, however, expressly relates, that our Lord first addressed himself to Thomas: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (that is without doubt, to JESUS) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. So that both these distinct titles (for they are plainly mentioned as distinct) were manifestly ad∣dressed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to that one person Jesus, to whom Thomas

replied, as the text expressly informs us. The lan∣guage is so plain, when the whole context is consi∣dered, that the Socinian perversion of it is notori∣ous. See also 1 Cor. i. 24,—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and Acts ii. 36. There are also other exam∣Ples of this exception, which equally prove that Christ is God, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. † 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. † Rev. i. 17, 18.

These are the words of him whom John saw 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with a two edged sword proceeding out of his mouth; which was undoubtedly a representa∣tion of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or word of God, as this declara∣tion alludes plainly to his death and resurrection. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And again in the second chapter, ver. 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 † (and the same infallible mark of distinction is ad∣ded, to prove which of the divine persons is here to be understood) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Now though the explanation which Grotius has given us of these titles (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) is certainly true when ap∣plied to Christ, yet it does not appear to be the whole truth, or the full meaning that ought to be attribu∣ted to these titles, either in the Revelation or else where; for they have a manifest reference to the supreme titles of the Almighty in the first chapter, & 8th verse, (which also contains examples of this excep∣tion)

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And in the 22d chapter, 13th verse, where these titles, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, are, manifestly by the context, to be under∣stood as the titles of Christ, we find them explained by these other titles 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to which Grotius has attributed a much inferior and less com∣prehensive meaning. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And as I have shewn in my Tract on the Law of Nature, &c. p. 270 and 271 that these titles, "the first and the last," are ancient titles of Jehovah in the Old Testament, to declare his eternal existence, there can be no just reason for giving them an inferior sense, when they are appli∣ed to Christ, who was truly Jehovah, as a variety of texts do demonstrate. [Law of Nature, p. 248, to 345.]

Another example of the exception to the fifth rule occurs in the Rev. xx. 2,—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. These are two different names or appellatives attributed (by the explanatory words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) to the same Old Serpent.

THE END OF THE RULES.

The various uses of the article and copulative, expressed in the five last rules and their exceptions, must amply illustrate, to every attentive reader, the difference and particularity of those sentences which fall under the first and principal rule; and therefore I may now proceed with more confidence to point out several important corrections that ought to be

made in our common translation of the New Testa∣ment, if the several sentences, which fall under the first rule, be duly weighed and considered;—correc∣tions which may be fairly defended, I apprehend, by the authority of the several examples from which these rules were formed.

EXAMPLES

Of sentences, which fall under the FIRST RULE, and are improperly rendered in the English version.

Example I. 2 Pet, i. 1.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. As the Article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not repeated before the next descriptive noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it is manifest that both the nouns are to be referred to one and the same person; and therefore, in order to turn it into an intelligible English phrase, the proper name to which the two descriptive nouns re∣fer ought to be placed first, as

By the righteous∣ness of Jesus Christ OUR GOD, and our SAVIOUR.

Among the various readings collected by Curcel∣laeus, it appears, that, in some copies, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was not repeated after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and I have by me twen∣ty different editions (including those of Erasmus, Stephens, Dr. Mill, Bengelius, &c.) which follow that reading; viz. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; in which case a literal rendering into English will sufficiently express the sense of the Greek, without transposing the proper name, viz.

Through the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ.

The sense and purport, however,

is exactly the same in both the readings, and, in the old English editions, has generally been expressed in the terms required by my first rule; viz.

In the righteousness that cometh of oure God and Saviour Je∣su Christ

(fol. edit. 1549.)—

Through the righ∣teousnesse of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ.

(12mo edit. 1595.)—

By the righteousnesse of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ.

(4to edit. 1599.) —

The righteousness of Jesus Christ our God and Sa∣viour.

(margin of the folio, edit. 1611.) And even in the margin of our present version, the pro∣per reading is inserted,

of our God and Saviour,

manifestly referring both titles to one person. The learned Beza also remarks on the words of this text,

Ista necesse est conjunctim legamus, quia unicus est ar∣ticulus, ut copiosius diximus Tit. ii. 13. Itaque conti∣net etiam hic locus manifestum divinitatis Christi testi∣monium.

The two nouns are referred to Christ also in the Syriac version. There seems, therefore, to be ample authority for my first rule.

Exam. II. Titus ii. 13.—〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In some few copies a comma is inserted between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but with∣out authority. The abovementioned note of Beza upon this text, is too long to be inserted here at ••ength, and therefore I must refer you to the author himself. He insists, however, that these two titles do not refer to two distinct persons, because the article 〈◊〉〈◊〉 omitted before the second. In the present Eng∣lish

version it is rendered

the glorious appearing of the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ:

but so great is the difference between the idiom of the Greek tongue, and that of the English, that a literal translation will not always express the same sense, without some little transposition in the order of the words; and therefore, though the pronoun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is placed after the two descriptive nouns that are ap∣plicable only to one person as they are expressed in the Greek, yet the rendering of the said pronoun in English ought to be PREFIXED to the said descriptive nouns, in order to express the same sense in a proper English phrase; as,

the glorious appearing of OUR great God and Saviour Jesus Christ.

This is the rendering of the learned Hugh Broughton, accor∣ding to a printed English bible, corrected with a pen, in my collection. It might, indeed, be literally ren∣dered without transposition of the pronoun, viz.

the great God and Saviour OF US,

instead of

OUR great God and Saviour;

but the latter is more agreeable to the general mode of expressing that pronoun in English. Thus Christ is not only enti∣tled God, but even the "great God," according to the plainest grammatical construction of the text; and indeed, if we duly weigh the evidence of his being really Jehovah, and one with the Father, [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: the plural verb 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ("we are") marking the plurality, or distinction of more person than one, as much as the noun 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 marks the unity of

their existence] he must necessarily be esteemed

the great God,

because there is but ONE GOD. G. S.

Notes

• The distinction of persons mentioned in this sentence is pra∣served by the insertion of the article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 before 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which had been omitted before 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• This text is clearly a supplication to Christ for providential assistance; and being addressed to him jointly with God the Father, most certainly amounts to supreme worship, because the direction of Providence belongs to God alone: so that a prayer for it addressed to Christ, were he merely a minister or dispenser of God's provi∣dence and not also truly God, would be utterly unlawful; and more especially so, if such an inferior dispenser of providence (one that was not truly God) was to be addressed jointly with the heavenly Father; for that would be blasphemous.
• †

  Some copies have not the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in this twelfth verse, but only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in which last case this verse affords an example only of the second rule.
• The apostle, in this text, expressly calls our Lord Jesus Christ "the Great SHEPHARD OF THE SHEEP," 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and the apostle Peter entitles him "THE CHIEF SHEP∣HERD," —〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 1 Pet. v. 4. which compare with Psaim xxiii. 1. "JEHOVAH is my SHEPHERD," and with Isaiah xl. 9, 10, 11. "O Zion that bringeth good tidings," &c.

  say unto the cities of Judah, Behold YOUR GOD! Behold the Lord JEHOVAH will come in mighty (power), and HIS arm shall rule for him: behold HIS re∣ward is with him, and HIS work before him. HE,

  (i. e. the Lord JEHOVAH) "shall feed HIS flock like a SHEPHERD: he shall gather the lambs with his arm," &c. &c. To explain this still further, the pro∣phet Ezekiel foretold that "all shall have one Shepherd," Ezekiel xxxvii. 24. And Christ himself expressly acknowledged that emi∣nent pastoral character, saying

  I am the good Shepherd;' 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and I know MY sheep and am known of MINE,'

  (John x. 14.) And a little further (v. 27.) our Lord mentions the true mark by which his flocks are known, viz. that of Hearing his voice (compare with 95^th psalm)

  My sheep (said our Lord) hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, and I give unto them eternal life,

  &c. which power of giving eternal life cannot be an attribute of any per∣son that is not truly God, and one with Jehovah, or the heavenly Father, as, in the 30th verse, he is expressly declared to be, "I and my Father are one," 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, we are one; in which brief expression, both the plurality and the unity of the two persons are unquestion∣ably asserted.
• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the modern printed editions the reading is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but in the Complutensian and several of the oldest edi∣tions it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as also in the Alexandrian and other old MSS. as well as the ancient versions, and the citations of the Fa∣thers; for which see Wetstein's Testimony. Now compare this expression (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) with 1 Pet. ii. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and also with 2 Kings xvii. 35, and 36.

  ye shall not fear

  (rendered by the seventy 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉)

  other gods; but JEHOVAH, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt, &c. him shall ye fear.
• †

  Here the command of Christ is mentioned jointly with the com∣mand of God himself; which is a mode of expression never used concerning any other man, but the Man Christ Jesus our Lord "by whom are all things: (1 Cor. viii. 66. Hebrews i. 2. John i. 3. Col. i. 16.) and "by whom all things consist." Col. i. 17.
• In all these three texts, and in 2 John 3, there is a mannifest supplication made to Christ, jointly with God the Father, for grace, mercy, and peace; all divine gifts: the supplications, therefore, must necessarily be considered as acts of supreme worship to both.
• †

  The supplications for grace and peace jointly from God the Fa∣ther, and from the Lord Jesus Christ in all these five texts last cited, are so many unquestionable instances of prayer and supreme worship to CHRIST, as being a free disposer of those divine gifts jointly with his Almighty Father, agreeable to what I have already remarked above on 1 Thess. iii. 11, and Titus i. 1.
• Example of the exception to the fifth rule.
• †

  Example of the exception to the sixth rule.
• †

  Example of the exception to the sixth rule.
• †

  Example of the exception to the sixth rule.
• As we believe that three persons exist in one and the same God, we cannot believe any one of them to be less than God, without denying the unity of the Godhead. And as each person is God, it follows, that each must be the great God: Theophylact bears an explicit testimony to this conclusion in his commentary on St. Paul's epistle to Titus, ii. 13. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (says the learned and venerable commentator, exultingly, on the authority of this passage) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Now what be∣comes of their objections, who degrade the dignity of the Son, not allowing him even the name of God? Let them learn from this passage, that he is not only God, but the great God. He is called great not relatively, by com∣parison with another inferior God, but, absolutely, from his own native and essential greatness. Whitby, in his note on the same passage of Titus, has given some very solid reasons for applying the terms 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to our Saviour. His words are:

  Here it deserveth to be noted, that it is highly probable, that Jesus Christ is here styled the great God; first, because in the original the article is prefixed only before the great God, and therefore seems to re∣quire this construction, "the appearance of Jesus Christ the great God and our Saviour." Secondly, because as God the Fa∣ther is not said properly to appear, so the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 never occurs in the New Testament, but when it is applied to Jesus Christ, and some coming of his; the places in which it is to be found, being only these, 2 Thess. ii. 8. 1 Tim. vi. 14.2 Tim. i. 10. and iv. 1.8. Thirdly, because Christ is emphatically styled our hope, the hope of our glory, Col. i. 27.1 Tim. i. 1. And lastly, because not only all the ancient commentators on the place, do so interpret this text, but the Ante-Nicene fathers al∣so; Hippolytus (Antichrist. sect. 64.) speaking of "the ap∣pearance of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ; and Clemens of Alexandria (ad Gent. p. 5, 6.) proving Christ to be both God and Man, our Creator, and the author of all our good things, from these very words of St. Paul. Vid. tract. de vera Christi deitate, p. 44, 45.

  Hammond also in his literal marginal ver∣sion translates 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, thus, "the appearance of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ. EDITOR.

  The remainder of this letter is lost. The author had not Ieisure to copy the original letter before he sent it to the gentleman to whom it was addres∣sed, and therefore he requested him to return it as soon as he had perused and considered it; but the gentleman neglected this request; and the au∣thor, after several years solicitation, obtained only a part of the letter (as far as is here copied) and the remainder (which was written on a separate half sheet) he has never yet been able to recover. He had however a short memorandum of the several texts, which were explained in the latter part of the letter; and having since had favourable opportunities of examining the said texts, and of copying them very accurately from the ancient Alexandrian manuscript in the British Museum, he has been ena∣bled to make some short remarks on the versions of all the said texts, which may serve as a sufficient Supplement to this imperfect letter. Some notes have been added to this printed copy which were not in the original let∣ter.

  G. S.