Granville Sharp (10 November 1735 - 6 July 1813) was a British campaigner for the abolition of the slave trade, and a classicist.
He died on 6 July 1813, and a memorial of him was erected in Westminster Abbey. Sharp lived in Fulham, London, and is buried in the churchyard of All Saints Church, Fulham.
Sharp ardently sympathized with the revolt of the American colonists. He also advocated parliamentary reform and the legislative independence of Ireland, and agitated against the impressment of sailors for the Navy.
It was through his efforts that bishops for the United States of America were consecrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1787. In the same year, he was the means of founding a society for the abolition of slavery, and a settlement for emancipated slaves at Sierra Leone. Through this society, Granville came into contact with Thomas Peters, a former American slave who fought with the British during revolution in return for freedom. Sharp was instrumental in helping Peters receive a land grant in what is now Sierra Leone
Sharp was also one of the founders of the British and Foreign Bible Society and of the Society for the Conversion of the Jews.
“When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho, 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 ...”
Daniel B. Wallace says about Sharp:
But Wallace claims that this rule is often too broadly applied. “Sharp’s rule Number 1” does not always work with plural forms of personal titles. Instead, a phrase that follows the form article-noun-“and”-noun, when the nouns involved are plurals, can involve two entirely distinct groups, two overlapping groups, two groups of which is one a subset of the other, or two identical groups (Wallace, page 72-78). In other words, it is not always evident that anything significant for the meaning of the words happens merely by being joined by “and” and dropping the second article.
Of Granville Sharp's most successful critic, Calvin Winstanley, Wallace says:
What Wallace neglects by use of ellipses (...) is the flow of Winstanley's argument as well as the character of his theology. Winstanley's quote argued that one could not apply Sharp's rule to the possible exceptions unless it could be shown that extra-biblical literature also followed Sharp's rule. Through multiple examples Winstanley showed that in classical Greek and in patristic Greek - all the literature surrounding the New Testament, the rule simply did not apply consistently. Wallace's quote comes from the end of Winstanley's argument in which he clearly is not conceding the point. To complete Winstanley's argument:
Winstanley was a trinitarian Christian, but cautioned that a rule that held true only in the New Testament in all but the disputed cases was too flimsy a ground on which to try to prove the divinity of Christ to the Socinians (Unitarians). Instead he said, "[I think] there are much more cogent arguments in reserve, when [Sharp's] rule of interpretation shall be abandoned. His biggest criticisms of Sharp's rule rest in the fact that 1) the early church fathers do not follow it and 2) the early church father's never invoked this rule to prove the divinity of Christ (though it would have been an obvious tool against such heresy). He concludes, "Hence it may be presumed that the doctrine then rested on other grounds.
While it is affirmed by Wallace and other Biblical scholars that there is more and more confirmation of this rule, there are trinitarian scholars who continue to believe Winstanley's refutation sufficient.
It was this rule’s bearing on Unitarian doctrine, that led to a ‘celebrated controversy’, in which many leading divines took part, including Christopher Wordsworth.