The NKJV, the MKJV, and several other translations read “our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” at Titus 2:13.  A. T. Robertson noted that our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ “is the necessary meaning of the one article with theou and soteros just as in 2 Peter 1:1 (Word Pictures, IV, p. 604).  Concerning Titus 2:13, Granville Sharp stated: “This testimony, therefore, of the sacred text, in favour of our Lord’s divine nature, ought not to be withheld from the mere English reader” (Remarks, p. 51).  William Hendriksen wrote: “No valid reason has ever been found which would show that the (Granville Sharp) rule does not apply in the present case [Titus 2:13]” (Timothy and Titus, p. 375). Prince Hoare cited or reported that “the only sense in which the Greek Fathers understand that important passage, for instance, Titus 2:13, is that which is ascribed to it by Mr. Sharp” (Memoirs, I, p. 501).  Joseph Benson observed that Theodore Beza maintained “that one person only is spoken of, namely, Jesus Christ” (New Testament, II, p. 472).  Francis Turretin (1623-1687) as translated by George Giger wrote: “He is called ‘the great God’ (Tit. 2:13)–certainly not the Father, but the Son because only one article is prefixed to the words God and Saviour (which would not be the case if they were two persons)” (Institutes, I, p. 284).  Ankerberg and Weldon maintained that “even the context of Titus 2:13 shows that one Person, not two, was in Paul’s mind, for Paul wrote of the ‘glorious appearing’ of that Person” (Facts on Jehovah’s Witnesses, p. 24). James Buswell noted: “It is clear from the entire New Testament that it is Christ whose glorious appearing is expected: Christ Jesus is our great God and Saviour” (Systematic Theology, p. 104).  Gordon Clark noted: “The subject matter is the glorious return of our Lord. One person returns; not the Father, but the Son. Hence the great God and Jesus is the same person” (The Trinity, p. 17). 

     The 1611 edition of the KJV had a comma after God at Titus 2:13 [the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ]. The first KJV edition printed in America in 1782 and KJV editions printed at Oxford in 1788 and 1795 still have a comma after God at Titus 2:13.  Scrivener observed: “In regard to weightier matters, the comma put by 1611 after “God” in Titus 2:13 is fitly removed by 1769 modern, that ‘the great God and our Saviour’ may be seen to be joint predicates of the same Divine person” (Authorized Edition, p. 87).  The 1743 and 1760 Cambridge editions edited by F. S. Parris had removed the comma at Titus 2:13 before the 1769 Oxford followed them.

     Concerning Titus 2:13, J. H. Murray maintained that the KJV “makes it as if two persons were spoken of, the Father and the Son; where the Son only, in the original Greek, is mentioned” (Help, p. 64). In 1829, Edward Burton asserted: “In our authorized version, the words certainly do not necessarily imply that our Saviour Jesus Christ is the great God; but if we were to translate them, as we are equally authorized in doing, ’the glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ,’ it would be obvious to every reader, that the expression great God referred to Jesus Christ” (Testimonies, p. 113).  John Dick (1764-1833) included Titus 2:13 as an example of verses “in which the name of God is given to our Saviour, but the evidence does not appear to common readers, in consequence of the manner in which they have been translated” (Lectures on Theology, I, p. 316).  John Dick gave “our Great God and Saviour Jesus Christ” as “a translation more conformable to the original” (p. 317).  I. M. Haldeman wrote: “Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit the Apostle Paul speaks of Him as ’our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ’ (correct reading) (Titus 2:13)” (Bible Expositions, I, p. 456). Augustus Strong regarded Titus 2:13 to be “a direct, definite, and even studied declaration of Christ’s divinity” (Systematic Theology, p. 307).  E. W. Bullinger quoted from Titus 2:13 once as follows: “of our great God and Saviour” (Figures, p. 505), and he maintained that the latter clause of this verse is a “hendiadys: One person being meant, not two” (p. 669).  J. L. Dagg advocated that the rendering at Titus 2:13 be amended to “our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ” (Manual of Theology, pp. 183-184).  Concerning Titus 2:13, Ralph Wardlaw wrote: “To avoid all ambiguity, and to express the precise sense of the original, they ought to be rendered, ‘the glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (Discourses, p. 76).  Timothy Dwight asserted concerning Titus 2:13: “In the Greek it is the Great God even our Saviour Jesus Christ, or our Great God and Saviour Jesus Christ” (Theology Explained, I, p. 526).  In his English translation of the 1637 Dutch Annotations at this verse, Theodore Haak noted: “That is, of Jesus Christ, our great God and Saviour; for both these titles are here ascribed to Jesus Christ.”  Concerning this verse in his Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles, H. Harvey noted: “The following context, in the relative clause (verse 14), ’who gave himself for us,’ plainly relates only to Christ, but naturally requires us to take the whole preceding expression, ’our Great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ,’ as its antecedent” (pp. 139-140).  Concerning this verse in his commentary, Robert Horton asserted: “The qualifying description of verse 14, which refer to Jesus Christ, completely overbalances the sentence if Christ is to be separated from ’the great God’” (p. 186).  Francis Turretin noted: “Epiphaneia is never attributed to the Father, but always to Christ. He, whose advent we look for, is said to have given himself for us (Tit. 2:14), which applies to Christ alone” (Institutes, I, p. 284).