spin

Because you will not deal with reality.

As you have repeatedly refused to consider what I've asked of you your attempts to deal with the issue fail before you start. You didn't even consider the examples I dug up for you out of the LXX. Stick to aa5874.

TedM

I guess you don't know what "plausible" means. It doesn't have to mean probable. Just that the proposal is reasonable. My view is that the uses of "the Lord" when it is by itself in Mark are all somwhat ambiguous. They could be interpreted either way. You interpret only one way--they all mean Jesus. That's why I said you would not agree that there are no "the lords" that clearly refer to Jesus. What's the problem here?

TedM

Think about what I wrote above spin. Your view just doesn't make sense, so your examples won't matter to me. We can always come up with examples to support this or that but when they trump basic common sense they are worthless. How can you possibly find fault with what I'm saying here? It just makes no sense to tell the villagers that God would send the colt to Jesus.

aa5874

So, you are now BACKING OFF of your previous claim that the references to the Lord are ambiguous.

Please, your posts are recorded. You have been going around in circles from since the very start of the thread.

You keep changing your position.

Examine your own post #5 from July 28 in response to spin.

The references to the Lord in the NT are NOT ambiguous at all because it is established in the NT and in gMark that Jesus is the LORD.

From the very start of gMark John the Baptist prepared the way of THE LORD and baptized him in the Markan narrative.

Mark 1 gMark is about the Lord Jesus Christ and that John prepared the way for the Lord Jesus.

ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 2:28 (SBLGNT)ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 11:3 (SBLGNT)ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 16:19 (SBLGNT)
There is no ambiguity. Jesus is the LORD. Jesus is κύριος in gMark.

spin

TedM, please read these examples from the LXX and acknowledge that you have understood them:

[T2]Look at 2 Sam 14:32. Absalom said to Joab, "Look, I sent word to you, saying Come here (ωδε, as in Mk 11:3)". Would Absalom's agent have gone to Joab and said, "Come here"?

What about when the wise woman in 2 Sam 20:16 cried from the city wall, "Listen! Listen! Tell Joab, 'Come here (ωδε), I want to speak to you.'" What do you honestly think the listener(s) should have used to Joab... the following words, "Come here, I want to speak to you"?[/T2]

In each of these examples, what do you think the agent said to the 3rd party when they were told to say "come here"?

If you were consistent you'd have to say that they said, "come here", but of course that would be ridiculous.

TedM

That's reasonable too. Unfortunately for your position, God is also the Lord, so these passages can be read both ways. I lean toward your view re Mark mostly. Sorry for confusion.

TedM

I have read them. I understand them. I agree with them as valid examples to illustrate your point. I think however that they are fairly worthless because the passage in question is different, and as I indicated it makes no real sense to tell the villages that God is sending the colt to Jesus. So, either it was not part of what the disciples said, or they really meant something along the lines of assuring them that the colt would be returned to them promptly when the Lord was finished with it.

aa5874

You are now sorry. Please, I do not know what is happening. You seem to have other problems--NOT ONLY confusion.

Iskander

Mark 11 :3 is one of the many disputed verses; the word “ back” is taken by some translators to be part of what the disciples should say to the questioner, but others believe that the word “back” is an addition to the original text.

John William Burgon includes Mark 11:3 as one of the corrupted verses.


Taken from ,The causes of the corruption of the traditional text of the holy gospels being the sequel to the traditional text of the holy gospels by the late
John William Burgon, b.d. dean of Chichester arranged, completed, and edited by Edward miller, m.a. wykehamical prebendary of Chichester ,chapter v. , accidental causes of corruption. iv. Itacism



Who is “ho kyrios” in Mark 11:3? Professor Yarbro Collins says
Mark: A Commentary (Hermeneia: A Critical & Historical Commentary on the Bible) [Hardcover]. Adela Yarbro Collins (Author), Harold W. Attridge(Editor)

That is , the animal will be returned without delay



And ,The Catholic Study Bible translates the ho kyrios of 11:3 as “the master” .

TedM

You take things in such a literal manner that sometimes you overlook important nuances that allow for things not being black and white only. I mostly agree with you on Mark, but I also admit that spin is right when he says there is no example of "the Lord" in Mark that sounds like it means "Jesus" that cannot also sound like it means God, depending one's perspective.