Freethought & Rationalism Archive

TedM · 08-01-2013, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

It's normal second person/third person usage!

If it were normal you could show the precursors to it, but you know that you are speaking plain crap.

What do YOU think is a normal 3rd person usage of a word like "Teacher" or "Master" when the 2nd person usage has been demonstrated, spin?

Your dismissals are as ridiculous to me as my 'conjectures' are to you.

spin · 08-01-2013, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

It's normal second person/third person usage!

If it were normal you could show the precursors to it, but you know that you are speaking plain crap.

What do YOU think is a normal 3rd person usage of a word like "Teacher" or "Master" when the 2nd person usage has been demonstrated, spin?

Your dismissals are as ridiculous to me as my 'conjectures' are to you.

So you end the discussion resolutely blathering about what you can't find any evidence for.

TedM · 08-01-2013, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

It's normal second person/third person usage!

If it were normal you could show the precursors to it, but you know that you are speaking plain crap.

What do YOU think is a normal 3rd person usage of a word like "Teacher" or "Master" when the 2nd person usage has been demonstrated, spin?

Your dismissals are as ridiculous to me as my 'conjectures' are to you.

So you end the discussion resolutely blathering about what you can't find any evidence for.

No spin, I've asked you a question. I answered your objection. The precursor in Mark is 2nd person usage. Here's my question again:

What do YOU think is a normal 3rd person usage of a word like "Teacher" or "Master" when the 2nd person usage has been demonstrated, spin?

Why don't you give an answer, and then discuss the implications and/or relevancy?

aa5874 · 08-01-2013, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Try to put it into context, please, rather than this web of conjecture. I've pointed out that the LXX supports the usage of "the lord" for god and that reflects the earliest christian era. You've shown no evidence to allow you to think any differently here. Is this the stage where you go on self-ban rather than waste more time saying nothing?

The word "Lord" was not isolated to the Septuagint at all. It was used in the Roman Empire to refer to other Gods including ZEUS and Jesus---the Logos and God the Creator.

It is illogical to presume that the word Lord can only refer to the God of the Jews.

Glycon the God was considered LORD in the Roman Empire.

See http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/luc/wl2/wl218.htm

See Lucian's "Alexander the Oracle Monger.

Quote:

'Tell me, lord Glycon,' said he, 'who you are.' 'The new Asclepius.'

It is a complete fallacy that "Lord" in Galatians 1.19 did not refer to the Lord Jesus when in the very same chapter of Galatians that Jesus is clearly and directly declared to be the Lord.

Jesus is LORD in the Pauline Corpus and by the Jesus cult and God.

Philippians 2

Quote:

9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow , of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

spin · 08-01-2013, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

It's normal second person/third person usage!

If it were normal you could show the precursors to it, but you know that you are speaking plain crap.

What do YOU think is a normal 3rd person usage of a word like "Teacher" or "Master" when the 2nd person usage has been demonstrated, spin?

Your dismissals are as ridiculous to me as my 'conjectures' are to you.

So you end the discussion resolutely blathering about what you can't find any evidence for.

No spin, I've asked you a question. I answered your objection. The precursor in Mark is 2nd person usage. Here's my question again:

What do YOU think is a normal 3rd person usage of a word like "Teacher" or "Master" when the 2nd person usage has been demonstrated, spin?

Why don't you give an answer, and then discuss the implications and/or relevancy?

This question is not an answer to anything. It is not based on anything. It shows you haven't thought on the issue and that you don't want to think. And it shows you have found a way not to think.

I referred to the situation where "lord" is used in speech to the referent as "second person". To be grammatically clear it is a vocative, which is usually indicated in English as "O lord". There is no third person in such a situation. You refer to the particular person as you normally would in the third person, "the lord of the land", "our lord Jesus". You don't refer to them as you would to Yahweh, ie "the lord".

:wave:

stephan huller · 08-01-2013, 03:08 PM

It is hard for English speakers to relate to the vocative case. An example. The name Hamish has been borrowed into English in the vocative form. Hamish (proper Gaelic spelling Shéamais) is the vocative case of Seamus (proper Gaelic spelling Séamas) meaning James = Jacob. The vocative is the case of direct address. It is used when one person is speaking to another, calling out or saying their name, or generally addressing them. With many nouns, the case form of the vocative is the same as the nominative, but the context and function leave no question as to whether the person is being addressed or, alternatively, spoken about. (One should note that, obviously, the vocative is used most often in conjunction with the "second person" form of the verb).

For example: "... Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" (Acts 7:59). Here Stephen is directly addressing the Lord, so the form of "Lord Jesus" is in the vocative case. (Note that the verb "receive" is also in the second person, as would be expected).

It should be noted that while there are at least 128 uses of lord in the vocative in the Greek New Testament, there is no vocative case in Aramaic.

TedM · 08-01-2013, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by TedM

It's normal second person/third person usage!

If it were normal you could show the precursors to it, but you know that you are speaking plain crap.

What do YOU think is a normal 3rd person usage of a word like "Teacher" or "Master" when the 2nd person usage has been demonstrated, spin?

Your dismissals are as ridiculous to me as my 'conjectures' are to you.

So you end the discussion resolutely blathering about what you can't find any evidence for.

No spin, I've asked you a question. I answered your objection. The precursor in Mark is 2nd person usage. Here's my question again:

What do YOU think is a normal 3rd person usage of a word like "Teacher" or "Master" when the 2nd person usage has been demonstrated, spin?

Why don't you give an answer, and then discuss the implications and/or relevancy?

This question is not an answer to anything. It is not based on anything. It shows you haven't thought on the issue and that you don't want to think. And it shows you have found a way not to think.

I referred to the situation where "lord" is used in speech to the referent as "second person". To be grammatically clear it is a vocative, which is usually indicated in English as "O lord". There is no third person in such a situation. You refer to the particular person as you normally would in the third person, "the lord of the land", "our lord Jesus". You don't refer to them as you would to Yahweh, ie "the lord".

:wave:

Wow. So you think that anyone referencing someone they call "Master" would always say something like "the Master of the school" or "our Master Nicodemus" and would refuse to say "the Master"? Or is it just "Lord"? Lord is simply too precious to use in such a way, even though that's exactly what happened over time. IF it was so precious as to never be used early on by Paul or Mark, why not just avoid using the word at all in ANY context? Why even chance the blasphemy that ended up occurring?... Why are YOU assuming spin that the phrase itself was so sacred that it wouldn't be used in a different context when it would be clear that it isn't referencing God Himself? Where is the 'utter absurdity' or blasphemy?

No need to respond unless you have something new. :wave:

stephan huller · 08-01-2013, 03:21 PM

But there is something to this TedM. What is your actual objection to spin's observation?

spin · 08-01-2013, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

But there is something to this TedM. What is your actual objection to spin's observation?

He has no objection. He just doesn't like it.

hjalti · 08-01-2013, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

It is hard for English speakers to relate to the vocative case.

Really? It seems to be a rather simple concept.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-01-2013, 03:08 PM	#36
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	It is hard for English speakers to relate to the vocative case. An example. The name Hamish has been borrowed into English in the vocative form. Hamish (proper Gaelic spelling Shéamais) is the vocative case of Seamus (proper Gaelic spelling Séamas) meaning James = Jacob. The vocative is the case of direct address. It is used when one person is speaking to another, calling out or saying their name, or generally addressing them. With many nouns, the case form of the vocative is the same as the nominative, but the context and function leave no question as to whether the person is being addressed or, alternatively, spoken about. (One should note that, obviously, the vocative is used most often in conjunction with the "second person" form of the verb). For example: "... Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" (Acts 7:59). Here Stephen is directly addressing the Lord, so the form of "Lord Jesus" is in the vocative case. (Note that the verb "receive" is also in the second person, as would be expected). It should be noted that while there are at least 128 uses of lord in the vocative in the Greek New Testament, there is no vocative case in Aramaic.

08-01-2013, 03:21 PM	#38
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	But there is something to this TedM. What is your actual objection to spin's observation?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.