You are the one who claims everything revolves around "proper names".
As placed in the mind of Peter, Paul, et al.
So stop the bluster and tell us exactly which of these are proper names, in the mind of Paul.
I defined the terms for you so I don't have to keep answering, as I have, list after list:
- noun A common name, in distinction from a proper name. A common name, or appellative, stands for a whole class, genus, or species of beings, or for universal ideas. Thus, tree is the name of all plants of a particular class; plant and vegetable are names of things that grow out of the earth. A proper name, on the other hand, stands for a single thing; as, Rome, Washington, Lake Erie.
- noun An appellation or title; a descriptive name.
a common noun that is used to address a person or thing, for example ‘mother’ or ‘doctor’
noun: proper name
- a name used for an individual person, place, or organization, spelled with initial capital letters, e.g., Larry, Mexico, and Boston Red Sox. (Oxford languages)
- A common noun is the generic name for one item in a class or group. A proper noun, on the other hand, names a noun precisely . . . The distinction between common and proper nouns is usually quite easy to make, but it can occasionally be more difficult to intuit. (Grammarly)
Again, from Oxford Languages
Common noun . . . a noun denoting a class of objects or a concept as opposed to a particular individual.
Proper name . . . a name used for an individual person, place, or organization, spelled with initial capital letters, e.g., Larry, Mexico, and Boston Red Sox.
are specific names like Brian, Steve, Jesus. Common nouns are lord, savior, god. When used as a title, a common noun should be capitalized (Savior, Lord, God). "Christ" is more difficult to intuit
because, as Wiktionary notes, it is "A title
given to Jesus of Nazareth, seen as the fulfiller of the messianic prophecy; often treated as a personal name.
" This is why I said this one example, and only
this example is ambiguous to me until I have a chance to examine the usage more fully. And that is a huge labor. Right now, I'm not translating the Bible, so that is not a high priority. I'd prefer to leave it at that. At some point, I may have a better answer for you, but I'd prefer to give it when I'm
ready and not because I'm being badgered about it.
Rules of grammar are deliberately designed to standardize the language and mitigate
ambiguity. But we don't discard grammatical rules just because an ambiguity results (as they often do). That unfortunately is a result of the human element involved. The "Sharp" rule (I quote, because it was applied to passages and stated in comments and grammars long before him) does not hing on whether I understand "Christ" as a "title" or "a personal name" (Wiktionary). Greek readers can scratch their head on it and say "it's ambiguous," and just read and pass over it. However, translators actually have to make one
decision. As a translator, when I see an ambiguity I will err on the side of caution. I will not risk over ascribing
Deity to Christ in a passage where I feel there is such ambiguity. I'll only translate it in such a way when the case is clear. That's an honest answer, I wish you would respect that. 2 Peter 1:1, Titus 2:13, and Romans 9:5 are clear
examples. So is John 1:1, etc.
You can fix those two to Grammarly.
Thanks. I keep misspelling it. For some reason grammar
is easy for me, but Grammarly