Comments on: The Granville Sharp Rule EXPOSED https://historicalfaith.org God's Word is Truth Sat, 09 Aug 2025 23:35:06 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.2 By: Andrew Graham https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1679 Wed, 05 Jul 2023 08:58:26 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1679 In reply to Adam.

Short Comings of Christadelphianism

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid01EWB11cJ69o69fRMij3F7i5zMknaQR2Z3JvVoyaTZfWPZCt1x4SNXULULGtdAwSyl&id=1322737049

]]> By: rey johnson https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1619 Thu, 13 Apr 2023 02:40:51 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1619 The Granville Sharp rule denies the Trinity in actuality. And this is what you should tell any so-called Trinitarian who brings it up.

That is, they take a passage that dpeaks of two persons, Father and Son, and turn it into a Oneness Pentecostal paraphrase of a One Person God.

“God is one person: Jesus Christ” is the Oneness credo.
And using the Granville Sharp and Tricky Modalist rule they turn two-person passages into one-person passages!

That Granville was indeed one SHARP Modalist. He tricked Trinitarians into throwing away the KJV to re-“translate” their Bibles into teaching MODALISM.

From “the appearing of the Great God (The Father) and of our Savior Jesus Christ (the Son)”

they turn it into

“the appearing of the Great (One Person) God our Savior Jesus Christ”

So all Trinitarians defending the Granville Sharp rule have DENIED THE TRINITY and become outright ONENESS Pentecostals.

And thus you should say to them from henceforth.

]]> By: dave jacobs https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1618 Tue, 11 Apr 2023 21:15:16 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1618 My take: Only someone eho never studied Greek can buy the rule as legitimate. For one, just reading you will find plenty of cases that disprove it, so many that I can’t remember any and don’t need to as every other page will be one. For two, nothing is more likely in transmission of a text than for an article to appear or disappear (as a glance at the apparatus in a crirical text will quickly confirm), thus making a gigantic doctrinal issue hinge on the presence or absense of an article is plain stupid.

]]> By: admin https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1137 Fri, 14 Jan 2022 22:06:23 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1137 In reply to Adam.

Hi brother Adam,

My conclusion is based on how I understand the Bible.

If Jesus pre-existed, he would not have pre-existed as a human being. Human beings don’t pre-exist as humans . If Jesus pre-existed, the only way he was fully human, was to not have any memory or connection to a former existence. God would have changed him from one life form to another at conception. This would require a miracle.

Jesus is the only human being born of a virgin. This was a miracle by God. So God may have changed him from one life form to another at conception.

I don’t think the Bible places great significance on the preexistent of Jesus. Out of the four Gospels, only John mentions it. The Bible places greater emphasis on other aspects such as his humanity.

I don’t have a problem with Christians who disagree based on their interpretation of the word of God. While believers should keep an open mind, we should not compromise what we believe the Bible teaches.

Here are verses that I understand to teach that Jesus preexisted in some form before taking on human flesh: Proverbs 8:22-26 (The Septuagint says for verse 22, “The Lord created me as the beginning of his ways for his works;” The Lexham English Septuagint, Lexham Press, 2012); Micah 5:2; John 1:1, 3, 10, 15, 18, 30, 3:13, 31, 6:38, 42, 46, 6:62, 7:29, 8:38, 42, 58, 10:36, 13:3, 16:28, 17:5; 2 Corinthians 8:9; Ephesians 4:9, Philippians 2:5-8; Hebrews 1:2. Colossians 1:16-17; 1 Timothy 2:5, and Jude 5.

In Christ!

]]> By: Adam https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1136 Wed, 12 Jan 2022 20:16:27 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1136 Hello. Thank you for publishing this work. It is helpful to me. Full disclosure, I’m a baptised Christadelphian.
I’m curious, that in one of your comments you said you believe in the pre-existence of Christ. Can you briefly explain what you mean and the biblical proofs for this.
I’m always interested in honing my understanding of such arguments.
Thank you.

]]> By: Adam https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1135 Wed, 12 Jan 2022 20:09:43 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1135 In reply to Andrew Graham.

Hi. What short comings did you think the christadelphians had?

]]> By: PERCIVAL TANIERLA https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1100 Thu, 16 Dec 2021 21:44:09 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1100 MAN-MADE RULES CANNOT BE APPLIED TO DIVINE SCRIPTURES. THE PHARISEES AND SCRIBES MADE THE WORD OF GOD OF NONE EFFECT BY THEIR MAN- MADE RULES.

MARK 7:7, 13
And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’
13making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do.”

]]> By: admin https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1071 Tue, 07 Dec 2021 02:36:01 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1071 In reply to Ray Morris.

Hi Ray,
To my knowledge, no credible secular scholar or secular publication applies Granville Sharp’s original rules or the refinement of the first rule made by Dr. Wallace to secular writings of classical or Koine Greek. These rules never existed back then. After all, Granville Sharp admitted making these rules to make Jesus God in select Bible verses that he believed were mistranslated in the King James Version.

Because the rule is illegitimate, there are no verses it applies to.

Keep the faith!

]]> By: admin https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1069 Mon, 06 Dec 2021 02:24:04 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1069 In reply to Paul.

While I mentioned that Dr. Porter criticized the scholarship of Dr. Wallace, this was not the focus of the video. What about all the evidence presented in the video?

]]> By: Ray Morris https://historicalfaith.org/the-granville-sharp-rule-exposed/#comment-1068 Sun, 05 Dec 2021 22:24:10 +0000 http://www.trinityexamined.com/?page_id=1530#comment-1068 Hello Darrel
I’m one the thinks Granville Sharp Rule is nonsense.. I still have two questions I am seeking further info on… Do the other “profane” non-scripture, secular and even classical Greek writings apply Granville Sharp’s Rule? , and; Are there any scriptures that “look” as though the ought follow Granville Sharps Rule but obviously can’t?

Thanks so much!

Ray

]]>