Iver Larsen wrote:Second, Jesus in the NT is the key character. He will almost always be what Hoyle calls Hearer-Old and therefore is expected to have the article unless there is a good reason to make the reference salient or when the name is first introduced early in the gospels or in direct speech.
I think the fact that "προς ιησουν" is never used in the new testament implies that your explanation is not the main one, because one would expect some instances of it given the following distribution of "ιησους" (number of verses in the new testament):
Case / Articular / Anarthous
NOM / 344 / 153
ACC / 60 / 68
DAT / 31 / 63
GEN / 36 / 189
In my view, Hoyle's explanation best accounts for why there is no article in those constructions. If you read Hoyle's points again and try to apply them, I think you will agree. Remember that one common use of the name without article is when the person is first introuduced. A person is rarely introduced in a prepositional phrase, at least in narratives.
There are 29 instances of Ἰησοῦς following a preposition and preceded by the article. There are 25 instances where the article is not present. It is not enough to count numbers. You need to look at context and genre. 22 of the 29 occur in the gospels which are mainly narrative, with only 2 in Paul's letters. Similarly, only 5 of those without article occur in the gospels. and 11 in Paul's letters.
So, what you would want to focus on explaining is the minority. The 11 without the article are all in a context where Jesus is salient and in focus, often together with Christ. The two with article are in
Eph 4:21 καθώς ἐστιν ἀλήθεια ἐν τῷ Ἰησοῦ
Here the focus is on the truth that is found in Jesus. Jesus is known to the reader and he is not salient, as the focus is on truth. Paul does not need to tell them or emphasize where truth is found. The name is also at the end which is the position of least emphasis.
1 Thes 4:14 εἰ γὰρ πιστεύομεν ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἀνέστη, οὕτως καὶ ὁ θεὸς τοὺς κοιμηθέντας διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἄξει σὺν αὐτῷ.
Notice hos Jesus is salient and fronted in the first sentence without the article and how he is understood and not salient in the second one. It is a qualification of those who have died, and the topic is the deceased Christians, so the prepositional phrase is almost superfluous.
The few instances in the gospels without an article are also worth considering:
Mat 26:69 καὶ προσῆλθεν αὐτῷ μία παιδίσκη λέγουσα, Καὶ σὺ ἦσθα μετὰ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Γαλιλαίου
This is direct speech, so Jesus is introduced without the article. He is also salient.
Mat 26:71 καὶ λέγει τοῖς ἐκεῖ, Οὗτος ἦν μετὰ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζωραίου
Same as above. Notice also the apposition τοῦ Ναζωραίου as part of the introduction and identification.
Luk 24:19 οἱ δὲ εἶπαν αὐτῷ, Τὰ περὶ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναζαρηνοῦ
Again direct speech where Jesus is introduced to an apparent stranger. (They did not know who they were talking to.)
John 1:17 ὅτι ὁ νόμος διὰ Μωϋσέως ἐδόθη, ἡ χάρις καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο.
This is not narrative, and there is a strong contrast between Moses and Jesus. Both are salient, while the law and truth are in contrastive focus.
Mat 26:51 καὶ ἰδοὺ εἷς τῶν μετὰ Ἰησοῦ ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα ἀπέσπασεν τὴν μάχαιραν αὐτοῦ
Here one might have expected the article, but it looks llike the author wanted to make Jesus salient, possibly because we have one of the disciples of Jesus who was acting against the wishes of Jesus. Matthew might have intended to suggest that such behaviour could be expected by the disciples of other rabbis, but not of Jesus. As comparison Rev 20:4 has the article before Christ.