The Granville Sharp Rule, Timaeus 28C, and Titus 2:13

In Platonism, God, the One, could not be entirely comprehensible to finite minds, but a few of his qualities may be presented to finite minds under the figure of "Maker" and "Demiurge." It is a matter of scholarly debate as to whether or not subsequent idealists came to see "Father" and "Maker" / Logos as separate entities. Did Philo?

In any event, the term "Father" and perhaps even the term "The Father" could have functioned as the semantic equivalent of a personal name. The same thing goes for "God" and "the Great God." Apparently, Ethan Allen did not see any grammatical issues when he said, "In the name of the Great Jehovah and the Continental Congress." Of course, he wasn't alive as a Greek linguist in Antiquity, but were the quote I used from him an accurate translation of koine Greek, still it should not reflect conformity to Sharp's Rule -- nor would it be an exception to Sharp's Rule -- inasmuch as the first term is a proper (personal) name, and the second term is also a proper name, and is articulated; moreover, the second term is not semantically singular.

I used Ethan Allen purely for illustrating that a user of his native language will reflect cultural bias for idioms that make good sense to his countrymen, but may seem strange to those not versed in his culture. (Bible writers did not use the terms "Great Jehovah" and "Gracious Jehovah" as personal-name references, but our own literature has made use of those expressions in that way, which are not anti-Scriptural, even though ancient Jews may have found such personal-name references unusual if not puzzling since there would have been no cause to use such expressions as a polemic against pagan idolatry, though there was just that very reason for using expressions like "Almighty God" and "the (true) God" for identifying only Jehovah as the Almighty God, the only true God of Universal Sovereignty.)

Titus 2:13 is no exception to Sharp's Rule as enunciated by proponents (e.g., Dan Wallace) of it in its present form, though Sharp's Rule -- if there really is a legitimate Sharp's Rule, which "legitimacy" is dubious -- would nevertheless not function here to identify Jehovah God as the great god even if one entity (one being/person) is being referenced. Jesus Christ is a great god, a "mighty god," the "only-begotten god." There is nothing unscriptural nor anti-Scriptural in such a statement. Moreover, "The Great God" may have functioned in Antiquity as a personal name; if so, then even proponents of Sharp's Rule should see that they ought not to apply to it for establishing reference to one entity at Titus 2:13.

So, whereas Plato might not have used PATERA as a proper, personal name (see Timaeus 28c), and may have had reference to just one entity, would subsequent generations of Greek-speaking peoples have used Plato's expression to the same effect? Or might they have had something in mind other than what Plato had in mind? Again, it is a matter of scholarly debate as to whether or not subsequent idealists came to see "Father" and "Maker"/Logos as separate entities. Did Philo? We know that the apostle John wrote "the God" and "Logos" as references to two different entities (persons/bengs): Jehovah God and the Logos (Jehovah's only-begotten Son).