Just to be picky, I don't see that Divine Inspiration and bad grammar are mutually exclusive. We're going to wipe out a whole bunch of radio preachers with that doctrine! ;-)
But, literarily speaking, John's Gospel seems the most carefully crafted of the four. His omission of the definite article needs attention.
The προς seems to me, as a Trinitarian, to argue against modalism, not against the Trinity.
I generally construe the confessions of IHS as Κυριος to be confessions that He is THE God.
Spot on, MD.
The προς seems to me, as a Trinitarian, to argue against modalism, not against the Trinity.
That is a valid point, but I don't think modalism was an issue even in the late first century, when "John" wrote. No one believed that God the Father appeared as Jesus or that God the Father became flesh. The problem with "John' is the fact that it is heavily interpolated and that apparently more than one auhtor contributed his beliefs to the book.
I generally construe the confessions of IHS as Κυριος to be confessions that He is THE God.
Κυριος is simply a title of superiority or rank, not necessarily or exclusively a divine title. It is equivalent to the English "Sir." The Apostles never prayed to Jesus (earthly or risen), but only to God, the Father. There was never any confusion in that respect who was God and who was their lord (κυριος)