Titus 2:13
__________
BTW for support for my repudiation of "glorious appearing", see Wallace below. He translates it "the glory of ...."
Outline I. Granville Sharp and his Remarks on the Uses of the Definitive Article A. Sharp’s Rule B. Nearly Two Centuries of Abuse II. Linguistic-Phenomenological Analysis A. The Nature of the Construction in General B. The Construction Involving Personal, Singular, Non-Proper Substantives 1. A...
bible.org
The problem with the Granville Sharp "rule" is in its application and exceptions. As I understand it, it was formulated this way:
"When the copulative και connects two nouns of the same case, [viz. nouns (either substantive or adjective, or participles) of personal description, respecting office, dignity, affinity, or connexion, and attributes, properties, or qualities, good or ill], if the article ὁ, or any of its cases, precedes 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 expressed or described by the first noun or participle: i.e. it denotes a farther description of the first-named person . . . ."
In Titus 2:13, the most glaring issue with applying Granville Sharp is that the phrase is too complex to apply it. I think the copulative και is connecting "glory" which forms the first noun. The transliteration is "appearing of the 'glory of the great God' and 'of our Savior Christ Jesus'."
See, what is appearing is two things, (a) the glory of the great God, and (b) our savior Christ Jesus. We know that.
What isn't appearing is "the glory of ... our savior Christ Jesus." It is Jesus Christ himself who is appearing, not his glory. The application of Granville Sharp would give rise to a wrong translation i.e. "the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ" (per Wallace). This is not what Paul means. He is clearly referring to the appearing of Christ himself.
The phrase "of the glory of the great God" infers the first noun is "glory" and the second is "savior." They are referring to differ things, where "God" is just a qualifier to "glory."
So the Granville Sharp "rule" won't apply because it says "if the article ὁ, or any of its cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle". Here the article is repeated ("of the glory of the great God.") There are two articles before "of our Savior Christ Jesus."
BTW Winer (great greek grammarian of 19th century) agrees with me. He says "In Tit. ii. 13. . . considerations derived from Paul’s system of doctrine lead me to believe that σωτῆρος is not a second predicate, co-ordinate with θεοῦ."
2 Peter 1: 1 & 11
__________________
Winer (great greek grammarian of 19th century) has this to say In 2 Peter i. 1 “there is not even a pronoun with σωτῆρος." It is the same wth 2 Peter i. 11.
What he is inferring is that there is no pronoun before "savior" (second noun) to be moved antecendent to the first noun, per the Granville Sharp "rule" although, as formulated, it seems the rule applies, but has no effect on the existing word order. So I would interpret Winer as meaning "the Granville Sharp rule" is redundant in 2 Peter i. 1 & 11 and the Greek can be transliterated as it appears and mean whatever it might mean.
So if it says "having obtained a faith through [the] righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ," it can mean whatever makes the best sense, and ditto with "the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."
What is the best sense?
2 Peter 1:1 the phrase "righteousness of Christ" never appears in the bible. "Righteousness of God" appears many times. So the best sense would be "having obtained a faith through [the] 'righteousness of our God' and [our] 'Savior Jesus Christ." i.e. Faith comes through (a) the righteousness of our God, (b) Our savior Jesus Christ.
Contariwise in 2 Peter 1:11 the phrase "kingdom" clearly pertains to Christ, so no problems with seeing the application to Christ alone.