spin

Baby steps, TedM. Baby steps.

With respect to the use of "here" these examples are the same as NRSV Mk 11:3. Please acknowledge this, before going on, and, if necessary, explain how "here" in NRSV Mk 11:3 is different from the other examples.

In each case, person A tells person B through an agent to do something related to here. As you have acknowledged that my examples are valid regarding the issue of "here" and I assume that you see that the "here" must be changed. If Jesus had said what the NRSV has him saying, then that "here" must be changed by the agents as well. Please acknowledge this.

But who the hell says that??? You.

I have been trying to show you that the NRSV rendering ('The Lord needs it and will send it back here immediately.') is absurd when you analyse it, among other things, because of the significance of "here".

You already know the second is not functional.

aa5874

You agree with me and spin!!! Well, you are hopelessly confused.

I do not agree with spin's absurd argument.

I have shown that the Greek word for Lord refers to Jesus in the NT.

Also, in the Pauline and Non-Pauline Corpus when 'God', 'Jesus' and 'Lord' are in the same verse the "Lord" is DIRECTLY related to Jesus--Not God.

In the NT Jesus is the LORD.

1. Mark 16:19 NAS---So then, when the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God.

2. Acts 2:36 NAS---"Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ -this Jesus whom you crucified."

3. Romans 7:25 NAS---Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord.....

4. 1 Corinthians 1:3 NAS---Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

5. 2 Corinthians 11:31 NAS---The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, He who is blessed forever, knows that I am not lying.

6. Galatians 1:3 NAS---Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,

7. Ephesians 1:2 NAS---Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

8. Philippians 2:11 NAS---and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

9. Colossians 1:3 NAS---We give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you,

10. 1 Thessalonians 5:23 NAS---Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely ; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

11. 2 Thessalonians 2:16 NAS---Now may our Lord Jesus Christ Himself and God our Father, who has loved us and given us eternal comfort and good hope by grace,

13. 1 Timothy 1:2 NAS---To Timothy, my true child in the faith : Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

14. 2 Timothy 1:2 NAS---To Timothy, my beloved son : Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

15. Philemon 1:3 NAS---Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

16. Hebrews 13:20 NAS--- Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord

17. James 1:1 NAS--James, a bond-servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes who are dispersed abroad: Greetings.

18. 1 Peter 1:3 NAS----Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again

19. 2 Peter 1:2 NAS---Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord

20. Jude 1:21 NAS----keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting anxiously for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ

spin

The issue as I have so frequently repeated is the use of kurios in lieu of a name, which some wish to be Jesus, so I have substituted Jesus below in every instance of "the lord" (as well as "(our) lord") to see if we are dealing with cases of kurios in lieu of a name. One can never accuse aa5874 of grasping what he is talking about.

Are any of the uses above of "the lord" in lieu of a name??

aa5874

Please, your response is just absurd. Jesus is NOT a title. It is completely frightening that you would substitute the name Jesus for the title Lord when the name Jesus is already in the verse.

Your response is like substituting the phrase "the Lord God" with "the God God" because the Lord is directly related to God in Isaiah.

Isaiah 1:24 NAS---Therefore the Lord GOD[ the GOD GOD]of hosts, The Mighty One of Israel, declares, "Ah, I will be relieved of My adversaries And avenge Myself on My foes.

Isaiah 7:7 NAS---thus says the Lord GOD [ the GOD GOD]: "It shall not stand nor shall it come to pass.

Isaiah 10:23 NAS---For a complete destruction, one that is decreed, the Lord GOD [ the GOD GOD]of hosts will execute in the midst of the whole land

Isaiah 10:24 NAS----Therefore thus says the Lord GOD [ the GOD GOD]of hosts, "O My people who dwell in Zion, do not fear the Assyrian.....

Your response is completely without logic.

You should have been able to understand that when one finds the word "Lord" as in Mark 11.3 that one can use the name Jesus instead because the author has already established that his Jesus character is Lord long before the triumphal entry and the need to ride a donkey.

In Mark 2.28, the Jesus character declared he was Lord even of the Sabbath.

Mark 11:3 NASEssentially, in Mark 11 the TWO disciples merely had to say that Jesus needed the donkey and that he would return it.

spin

Still clueless, aa5874 just doesn't understand the topic, which is the use of kurios only when it is used in lieu of a name. The examples above show that aa5874 just doesn't understand what he's talking about.

(And of course "god" is not a name--try "Yahweh".)

TedM

I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time following you anymore
First in both cases the agent may well have said "X says to you "Come here to see me"", where "here" means where X is.

In 11:3 the NSRV version is similar but again the agent could have said " The lords says that he needs it and will send it back to here when he is done".

So yes "here" may have been spoken by the agent as long as the agent has made the context clear to the listener.

But 11:3 is different than simply "Come here" though. The response of the agent is to the question "Why are you doing this?" There is a need for reassurance. 1. Someone important needs it 2. it will be returned. It is also different in that the hearer is supposed to act by going to Absalom or the woman. In NRSV Mark the villagers aren't supposed to act. Rather is the the Lord who is doing the sending. So, I just can't easily compare these.

I mentioned before that using the word "immediately" seems counter to the idea that "here" meant at the village. I thought I posted earlier, but now cannot find the post: the word for "immediately" is euthys which according to Strong's doesn't even have to do with timing necessarily:

1) straight, level
2) straight forward, upright, true, sincere
3) straightway, immediately, forthwith

As such it could mean " and he will surely send it back here" which is meant to reassure the villagers, and removes my objection to the implication of immediate sending.



I can't because I am not convinced that Jesus intended for "here" to be where he was at.


I don't see it.



Not sure what you mean by "functional" but as I state above, I think the second could be the meaning and if it was it could be rendered as NRSV.
I just don't see the problem with this and I do not acknowledge that it is the same usage as your examples above.

aa5874

I am merely exposing your fallacies and absurdities. How in the world can you establish what "the Lord" refers to in any passage before you first find direct references to the Lord either to Jesus or God??

One must first establish if Jesus or God is referred to as the Lord and then look for the word "Lord" and substitute it with Jesus or God based on the CONTEXT.

1. Jesus is DIRECTLY called the Lord in gMark

2. The Greek word for LORD is found as a DIRECT Title of Jesus in gMark.

3. The Jesus character calls himself LORD in gMark.

1. Mark 12. Mark 5:19 3.Mark 11:3 A PERFECT example is the KJV and NAS version of Mark 16.19. The word Jesus is omitted in the KJV but it refers to the same Lord Jesus character in the NAS VERSION

Mark 16:19 KJV Mark 16:19 NAS It would be hopelessly absurd if the NAS Mark 16.19 wrote JESUS JESUS or LORD LORD to identify the character.

It is clear that the LORD is the same character called by the name Jesus in gMark, in the NT Canon and by the Jesus cult.

spin

That's because you aren't taking baby steps but are trying to jump ahead.

So you imagine that in all cases the agent prefixes what he is told to say with "X says to you".

Agent: 'My boss says to you, "come here to see me."'

But where is "here"? It is not at all transparent in the communication. The only here available to the agent and the 3rd party is the location where the agent says "come here to see me."

I will say this one again, "here" is where the speaker is and the speaker in this case is the agent, not the 1st party. When they 1st party says "come here and see me", the "here" has a different indication from that of when the agent says it. The agent obviously didn't say "come here", but rephrased the statement for the context.

This issue doesn't matter in a story, because everything is recontextualized in a non-real world and you translate your normal understandings to that of a fly on the wall in that non-real world. Forget these sorts of matters as they aren't relevant to the speech act we are looking at.

This is a game, TedM. Yeah, sure, the text isn't the same, but the situation is. A 1st party instructs an agent to tell a 3rd party to do something which involves "here". We examine this "here" and how it could be manifested in the two communications, between the 1st party and the agent and between the agent and the 3rd party.

You are assuming your conclusion. You are assuming that the text must include "and he will immediately send it back here" in the reassurance. You need to demonstrate that, but the NASB translation shows that the assumption has no basis. It may be that the NASB is wrong, but you have to demonstrate that #2 is part of the reassurance to show it is wrong.

Utterly wrong. This is mere weaseling. Obviously #1 is irrelevant and you haven't got the stomach for #3, so you weasel with #2 and disfigure the text to say what you desire and try to invent a new meaning for the word ευθυς. Strongs is for no-hopers. Try Liddell & Scott.

And let's face it, TedM, your notion of common sense too frequently adds up to you manipulating the data for your desired outcome, the case here.

You need to understand the subject and common sense cannot help you, because the subject isn't common. Common sense only works when you are dealing with common things.

You haven't said enough at this point. If "here" isn't as "here" indicates, ie where the speaker is, you need to say where you think it is.

To get a start on deixis, look at the Wiki page.

Putting aside your dismal weaseling on ευθυς, "immediately" isn't communicative in the NRSV version. Jesus won't return it immediately. He has to ride it into Jerusalem, so you then have to manipulate the text to insert "after he's finished with it". Reading it with the NASB requires no manipulation. The NRSV is not functional.

So,

1. "immediately" points against the NRSV approach;
2. "here", when you eventually grasp the issue, shows it doesn't work; and
3. the fulfillment of Jesus's prophecy doesn't support it, because there is no returning of the animal. If we take the NASB approach there is a fulfillment, in that the animal was sent back to Jesus immediately.

The NASB approach requires no manipulation to accommodate "immediately", no problem with "here" and fulfills the prophecy.

As this is now so boring, you get last say.

Justin Z

Can you read Greek?

aa5874

I have knowledge of Greek.