Below is a rough translation and some preliminary comments
regarding Mark 13:24-37, the Revised Common Lectionary gospel reading for the
first Sunday of Advent in Year B.
Apocalyptic texts are difficult – by design and intention,
I imagine. Because of that, they push back against attempts to make them neat
packages. I don’t think it is possible or necessarily even desirable to
leapfrog back to the original moment and dismiss the effective history of
apocalyptic texts. They have shaped and have been shaped by many
interpretations over the years. While we might wish some of the
misinterpretations or misuses of the texts had never happened, I think that
wildness is part of the power of an apocalyptic text. If a text’s meaning could
be neatly packaged, I think it would be an historic artifact of an apocalyptic
text, not an apocalyptic text itself. The text’s own inner disturbance resists
the kind of exactitude or objective distance that many of our interpretive
habits try to impose on it. (That may be true of all texts, in some ways, but
it seems particularly true with apocalyptic texts). So, while I believe it is
possible to maintain a discipline when studying this text, I also believe that
the nature of exegesis as an art, rather than as a science, becomes really
clear with texts like this. Only it is not an art created in a sequestered
studio or displayed in a pristine gallery. It is street art, spraypainting in a
hurry so as not to get caught, knowing that the profound meaning of one’s
graffiti may well be painted over in taupe tomorrow. But, still, it is a
message of the moment, a message of power, that needs to be given.
The one thing I say strongly about apocalyptic texts is
that it is simply ruinous to treat them like things, whether we treat them like
puzzle pieces or timelines or some other packaged commodity. I suggest we let
the wildness be wild, let the lack of neat wrappings be missing without having
to supply it. It is a challenge for both the exegete and the preacher to let
the text have its say. For the exegete that may mean raising questions more
than answering them. For the preacher that may mean eschewing all of the
packaging one is taught in Homiletics classes and letting a wild text lead to a
wild sermon, without treating the congregation like fragile glass. To me,
apocalyptic texts are songs that end with a V7 chord, that may not resolve to
the root. Do we have the courage to let that happen in a sermon?
For study's sake, I think it would be interesting to look at all of 'continuation/contrast' words throughout this text - δὲ (yet/and/but), ἀμὴν (amen/truly), γὰρ (for), ὡς (as), and so forth, to see whether they suggest a gathering of thoughts, a linear outline of events, or what. The tenses of the verbs also are interesting. Are these events now, past, future, or temporal fluid? The voicing of the verbs is also interesting. Are the indicative, indicating what is, or subjective, indicating possibility, or imperative, indicating necessary action, or something else? I suspect the fluidity of the voicing is partly what make apocalyptic texts apocalyptic, and wild.
Okay, I’m done. As usual, your comments are welcomed.
24 Ἀλλὰ ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις μετὰ τὴν
θλῖψιν ἐκείνην ὁ ἥλιος σκοτισθήσεται,
καὶ ἡ σελήνη οὐ δώσει τὸ φέγγος αὐτῆς,
But in those days after that affliction the
sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give her light,
σκοτισθήσεται: FPI
3s, σκοτίζω, 1) to make dark, deprive of light. In
NT only passive to be darkened.
δώσει: FAI 3s, δίδωμι, 1) to give
1. The phrase “that affliction” is
interesting. Mark uses it in the parable of the sower (4:17) to describe what
causes the seeds that fell on the stone and had sprung up quickly to wither
because they had no root, and in v.19 of this chapter. Matthew likewise uses it
in his parable of the sower and apocalyptic text. Luke does not use it. John
uses it 2 times, speaking of the pain of childbirth and forthcoming affliction
in 16: 21 and 33. Acts uses it several times, Paul/pseudo-Paul use it often, in
ways that we might speak of “persecution,” not some far off end-time ordeal. By
the time the reader gets to the book of Revelation, it is a word that has accumulated
varied meanings. This is far too common a word, and tragically too common an
experience, for end-time theorists to draw a connective line between all the
uses of the word and plot them on a timeline as a single unfolding event.
Affliction is more like an ongoing part of human experience throughout time,
including whatever one sees as the ‘end time.’
Here, the “affliction” is a specific
experience, which, I think, is around the destruction of the temple in
Jerusalem in 70 CE.
2. It seems odd that the darkness of the
sun is in the passive voice, but the darkness of the moon is in the active
voice. It would be interesting to see how 1st century science (as
known by someone like Mark) and the lingering mythologies of Helios and Selena
play into these references. The comment from I Corinthians 15:41 may give us a
glimpse of the 1st century mind about the heavenly bodies: “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of
the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differs from another
star in glory.”
25 καὶ οἱ ἀστέρες ἔσονται ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πίπτοντες,
καὶ αἱ δυνάμεις αἱ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς σαλευθήσονται.
And the stars shall be falling out of the
heaven, and the powers which are in the heaven will be shaken.
ἔσονται: FMI 3p, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen,
to be present
πίπτοντες: PAPart npm, πίπτω, 1) to
descend from a higher place to a lower 1a) to fall (either from or
upon) 1a1) to be thrust down
σαλευθήσονται: FPI 3p, σαλεύω, 1) a motion produced by winds,
storms, waves, etc 1a) to agitate or shake
1. “The powers that are in the heaven”: Now that’s a phrase
to ponder, isn’t it? Does it refer to a 1st century mythical
understanding of the skies? Does it refer to a proleptic sense of gravity, the
effect of the moon on the tides, the correspondence of changing constellations
and changing seasons, the various events that cause the night to be longer in
one season and the day in another? It strikes me that sea-faring, nomadic, and
herder folk had to be very savvy when it came to daily, monthly, seasonal, and
annual patterns in the skies. As for the conjectures that connected these
observable effects with causes, perhaps that is where mythology supplied and
still may supply some purpose and meaning.
26 καὶ τότε ὄψονται τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐρχόμενον
ἐν νεφέλαις μετὰ δυνάμεως πολλῆς καὶ δόξης.
And then they will see the son of the man entering
in clouds with great power and glory.
ὄψονται: FMI 3p, ὁράω, 1) to see with the eyes
ἐρχόμενον: PMPart asm, ἔρχομαι, 1) to
come
1. The Son of man entering in clouds: Mark is employing a
familiar image from the 2nd century BCE portion of Daniel, which I
believe was part of a new eschatology among Jews regarding how God deals with
evil. (I think it was a theological crisis when the temple, the king, and the
land were all imperiled. Those were the three visible signs of God’s presence
and blessing. Was God dead? Was God being unfaithful to the covenant? Or, is
God’s justice on a timetable all its own? I think this is the kind of peril
that brought innovative theology into play during the time of Alexander the
Great’s Empire and its dismantling after his death.)
In Daniel 7:13-14, “one like a son of man” comes with the
clouds of heaven and is given dominion, glory and kingship. Notice that Mark’s
Son of Man appears “coming in clouds” but there is nothing about whether he
actually descends to the ground. What he does is sends messengers to gather the
elect.
2. They will see: The pronoun/subject is implied in the 3rd
person plural form of the verb. Curious that it is not “you will see.”
27 καὶ τότε ἀποστελεῖ τοὺς ἀγγέλους καὶ ἐπισυνάξει
τοὺς ἐκλεκτοὺς [αὐτοῦ] ἐκ τῶν τεσσάρων ἀνέμων ἀπ' ἄκρου γῆς ἕως ἄκρου οὐρανοῦ.
And then he will send the angels and gather
the [his] elect out of the four corners from end of earth to end of heaven.
ἀποστελεῖ: FAI 3s, ἀποστέλλω, 1) to
order (one) to go to a place appointed
ἐπισυνάξει: FAI 3s, ἐπισυνάγω, 1) to
gather together besides, to bring together to others already
assembled
1. The angels are “gathering the elect,” using the same verb that
Luke 13:34 uses to describe the hen, who “gathers” her brood for protection.
2. The elect: Mark only uses this phrase three times, all in
this chapter – vv.20, 22, and here. In the NT, the word is used to signify
Jesus as the chosen one of God (I Peter 2:4), as well as people like Rufus (Rom
16:13) or “the elect lady” of II John 1:1 and 1:13, and mostly for the church.
3. I suspect phrases like “four corners” and “end of earth to
end of heaven” (no definite articles in this phrase) are 1st century
sayings, like “from stem to stern,” signifying “all over.” The elect have been
scattered during the affliction.
28 Ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς συκῆς μάθετε τὴν παραβολήν: ὅταν ἤδη ὁ κλάδος αὐτῆς ἁπαλὸς γένηται καὶ ἐκφύῃ τὰ φύλλα, γινώσκετε
ὅτι ἐγγὺς τὸ θέρος ἐστίν.
Yet from the fig tree learn the parable: When
her branch becomes tender and produces the leaves, know that the summer is
near.
μάθετε: AAImpv 2p, μανθάνω, 1) to
learn, be appraised 1a) to increase one's knowledge, to be increased in knowledge
1b) to hear, be informed
γένηται: AMS 3s, γίνομαι, 1) to become, i.e. to come
into existence, begin to be, receive being 2) to become, i.e. to come to
pass, happen
ἐκφύῃ: PASubj 3s, ἐκφύω, 1) to
generate or produce from
γινώσκετε: PAI 2p, γινώσκω, 1) to learn to know, come to
know, get a knowledge of perceive, feel
ἐστίν: PAI 3s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen,
to be present
1. Mark’s only other use of “fig tree” is the episode in
c.11, when Jesus sees a fig tree that had leaves but no fruit, cursed it, and
then they see it withered the next morning. It is curious that, given the
proximity of that event to Passover, some people have said that either Jesus or
Mark lacks an understanding of fig trees, because it was not supposed to have
fruit at that point. This verse seems to demonstrate that “Jesus/Mark know fig
tree patterns just fine, thank you.”
29 οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς, ὅταν ἴδητε ταῦτα γινόμενα, γινώσκετε ὅτι ἐγγύς
ἐστιν ἐπὶ θύραις.
Likewise also you, when you may see these
things becoming, know that he/it is near at the door.
ἴδητε: AASubj 2p, ὁράω, 1) to see
with the eyes 2) to see with the mind, to perceive, know
γινόμενα: PMPart apm, γίνομαι, 1) to
become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being
γινώσκετε: PAImpv 2p, γινώσκω, 1) to
learn to know, come to know, get a knowledge of perceive, feel
ἐστίν: PAI 3s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen,
to be present
1. I know that the verb “becoming” is awkward here, but I
want to show that it is the same verb as the branch of the fig tree becoming tender. Frankly, I think the
KJV phrase “it came to pass” picks up well the experience where the agency of
actions is not evident. (Some refer to moments like these as the ‘divine
passive,’ where God is the implied agent. Maybe. Perhaps it is a 1st
century way of expressing the current popular response, “Wow, that just
happened.”)
2. The door, the gate, the entrance: There seems to be a
subtle shift of focus with this term. Whereas the Danielic reference to the son
of man appearing in clouds was something of a rescue or at least a vision of
sustenance in a time of suffering, the tone after this reference to he/it
someone/something being at the door seems to be more threatening to the
listener who is to stay awake and to be ready. Is that which is at the door a
rescue or a threat?
3. Translations disagree over whether the implied subject of
the verb ἐστιν (is) should be “it” (YLT, KJV, NIV) or “he” (ESV, NRSV).
Grammatically, either one is permissible.
30 ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι οὐ μὴ παρέλθῃ
ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη μέχρις οὗ ταῦτα πάντα γένηται.
Amen I say to you that this generation may
not pass until all these things which may become.
λέγω: PAI 1s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak
παρέλθῃ: AASubj 3s, παρέρχομαι, 1) to go
past, pass by 1a) of persons moving forward 1a1) to pass by
γένηται: AMSubj 3s, γίνομαι, 1) to
become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being
1. For “become”: See v.30, n.1.
2. The verbs ‘pass’ and ‘become’ are subjunctive, placing
this whole phrase in the conditional mode. I see two possibilities for
translating and interpreting this conditional mode. It could be something like,
‘not this until that,’ as reflected in the NIV’s “this generation will
certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.” In that case, the
‘until’ is the condition but everything else is strongly indicative. On the
other hand, the condition could be ‘maybe this and, if so, then that,’ as
reflected in Young’s Literal Translation, “this generation may not pass away
till all these things may come to pass.” If Mark is writing this text in the
midst of unfolding events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem, then
perhaps the conditional voice is the best that he can offer to represent Jesus’
teachings in a fluid situation.
31 ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ παρελεύσονται, οἱ δὲ λόγοι μου οὐ μὴ
παρελεύσονται.
The heaven and the earth will pass, but my
words will not pass.
παρελεύσονται: FMI 3p, παρέρχομαι, 1) to go
past, pass by 1a) of persons moving forward
παρελεύσονται: FMI 3p, παρέρχομαι, 1) to go
past, pass by 1a) of persons moving forward
1. I typically translated δὲ as "yet," since it could imply either continuation (and) or contrast (but). Here, it strikes me as providing contrast, so I am going with ‘but.’
32 Περὶ δὲ τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης ἢ τῆς ὥρας
οὐδεὶς οἶδεν, οὐδὲ οἱ ἄγγελοι ἐν οὐρανῷ
οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός, εἰ μὴ ὁ πατήρ.
Yet concerning that day or the hour no one
has known, neither the angels in heaven nor the son, except the father.
οἶδεν: PerfAI 3s, εἴδω, ἴδω, an obsolete form of the present tense, the place
of which is supplied by ὁράω. The tenses coming from εἴδω and retained by usage
form two families, of which one signifies to see, the other to know.
1. Again we have a δὲ. I am reverting back to “yet,” because at this rough stage of translation I am not ready to determine whether this verse continues the thought of the last or offers a kind of contrast, or something else.
2. The verb “has known” is in the perfect tense – a past action with present
effect.
33 βλέπετε ἀγρυπνεῖτε: οὐκ οἴδατε γὰρ πότε ὁ καιρός ἐστιν.
Look be awake; for you do not know when the
time is.
βλέπετε: PAImpv 2p, βλέπω, 1) to
see, discern, of the bodily eye
ἀγρυπνεῖτε: PAImpv 2p, ἀγρυπνέω, 1) to be
sleepless, keep awake, watch 2) to be circumspect, attentive, ready
οἴδατε: PerfAI 2p, εἴδω, ἴδω, an obsolete form of the present tense, the place
of which is supplied by ὁράω. The tenses coming from εἴδω and retained by usage
form two families, of which one signifies to see, the other to know.
ἐστίν: PAI 3s, εἰμί, 1) to be, to exist, to happen,
to be present
1. Both βλέπω and εἴδω are
verbs grounded in the act of ‘seeing.’ And, as with the English word, its
meaning ranges from actively looking to perceiving/knowing.
2.
Readers of Paul Tillich (me!) will want to infuse καιρός with more meaning than
may be warranted here. It could just refer to the day and hour of v.32.
34 ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἀπόδημος ἀφεὶς τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτοῦ καὶ δοὺς τοῖς δούλοις αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐξουσίαν, ἑκάστῳ
τὸ ἔργον αὐτοῦ, καὶ τῷ θυρωρῷ ἐνετείλατο
ἵνα γρηγορῇ.
As a man abroad having left his house and having
given to his slaves the authority, to each his work, also commanded the
doorkeeper in order that he would watch.
ἀφεὶς: AAPart
nsm, ἀφίημι, 1) to
send away … 3e) to go away leaving something behind
δοὺς: AAPart nsm, δίδωμι, 1) to
give
ἐνετείλατο: AMI 3s, ἐντέλλομαι, 1) to
order, command to be done, enjoin
γρηγορῇ: PASubj 3s, γρηγορέω 1) to keep awake, to watch
1.
Translated woodenly, as I do at this stage of my work, this ends up being an
incomplete sentence. One can remedy that by making ὡς into “it is like,” instead of simply “as.”
2.
If we are interpreting this traveler as the Son of Man who is to return at an
unknown hour, there are two types of good servants here: Those who have
authority and a commission to work their proper tasks; and those who are porters
and commissioned to stay awake and watch the door. To paraphrase Paul, “If all
are porters, where will the house cleaning be? If all are watching the door,
who is keeping the fire burning?”
3.
This seems to be a curious place to toss in a mini-parable.
35 γρηγορεῖτε οὖν,
οὐκ οἴδατε γὰρ πότε ὁ κύριος τῆς οἰκίας
ἔρχεται, ἢ ὀψὲ ἢ μεσονύκτιον ἢ ἀλεκτοροφωνίας
ἢ πρωΐ,
Therefore watch, for you have not known when
the lord of the house is entering, whether evening, or midnight, or
cock-crowing or morning.
γρηγορεῖτε: PAImpv 2p, γρηγορέω 1) to keep awake, to watch
οἴδατε: PerfAI 2p, εἴδω, ἴδω, an obsolete form of the present tense, the place
of which is supplied by ὁράω. The tenses coming from εἴδω and retained by usage
form two families, of which one signifies to see, the other to know.
ἔρχεται: PMI 3s, ἔρχομαι, 1) to come
1. Here and in v.26 I translate ἔρχομαι as ‘entering’ because it is in the middle voice.
2. Now the question becomes who the target audience of Jesus’
words is. Who is the implied “you” in the 2nd person voicing of the
imperative “watch” here and by the pronoun ὑμᾶς (pronoun for “you”) in the next
verse and the emphatic πᾶσιν (all of you) in v.37? Who are the porters to whom
Jesus is speaking? In v.34 the job of watching seemed to be assigned to the
doorkeeper, while others went about their proper work.
3. As in v.32, οἴδατε (have
not known) is in the perfect tense.
36 μὴ ἐλθὼν ἐξαίφνης [ἐξέφνης in some mss.] εὕρῃ ὑμᾶς καθεύδοντας.
Having
come suddenly may he not you sleeping.
ἐλθὼν: AAPart
nsm, ἔρχομαι, 1) to come
εὕρῃ: AASubj
3s, εὑρίσκω, 1)
to come upon, hit upon, to meet with
καθεύδοντας:
PAPart apm, καθεύδω, 1) to fall asleep, drop off to sleep
37ὃ δὲ ὑμῖν λέγω, πᾶσιν λέγω, γρηγορεῖτε.
But
this I say to you, I say to all, keep awake.
λέγω: PAI 1s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak
λέγω: PAI 1s, λέγω, 1) to say, to speak
γρηγορεῖτε: PAImpv 2p, γρηγορέω 1) to keep awake, to watch
1. By now, the division of labor in v.34 has
fallen by the wayside and “all” are called to be porters, keeping awake and
watching the door. I find this a little confusing, not as a singular idea but
as an idea within the flow of the whole text.
2. This
pericope began with the “affliction,” after which the sun would be darkened and
the moon lightless. Needless to say, that would be quite the wake-up call,
which contrasts with the idea that the porter would be sleeping out of boredom
and caught unawares of when the departed one would return.
3. There are lots of moving parts here. I hope
my comments about the wild nature of apocalyptic texts above is real, and not
just a way that I am trying to “make it okay” for the structure of this text to
be elusive as a whole.
really helpful!
ReplyDeletejust don't know exactly how it will come together for Sunday at this point, but a great contribution!
Thanks for this exegesis... As Tom Blair has said, I'm not sure how this is going to come together on Sunday morning, but I've got more to work with now... :)
ReplyDeleteThanks Tom and Kayelar. My the Spirit give you ... something between now and Sunday.
ReplyDeleteGlad to be back in the Gospels for Advent... I'm taking a break from Narrative and preaching this text tomorrow. This was super helpful (per usual) and I'm working with the imperative to stay awake... using the current and very real need to #staywoke... that we don't fall asleep out of boredom but self preservation.
ReplyDeleteThanks as always!!
Thanks, Shawna. You are always so gracious. And I'm using #staywoke soon.
DeleteFirst time I’ve read your blog... love your approach. Great help for Sunday. Neil
ReplyDeleteThanks, Neil. Blessings on your Advent journey. MD
DeleteSo heaven and clouds seem related. The overarching structures are falling apart, the thlipsis (pressure? walls closing in?) is happening, and a new 'heavenly' reality is entering the scene - crucified and risen one? Not the fixer of the powers, but the life renewer?
ReplyDeleteHi Bill,
DeleteI like the way you've put crucifixion and resurrection together as twin pillars for holding the destructiveness and renewing qualities together. That's working for me. MD
Your translations and commentaries are always so helpful. Apocalyptic texts are wild and have often been used to frighten believers but my understanding is that apocalyptic writings are seen as comforting. That despite the experience of the powers and principalities being dominant and in control, we are to stay awake and recognize that the true power is on the side of the oppressed, that the true power shakes the very heavens, gathers the elect and reveals that the principalities and powers of this world are temporary. Perhaps a word of hope to those who are oppressed...God is on our side.
ReplyDeleteAs a recovering oppressor and Calvinist (starting with 'total depravity') I'm nervous about identifying God with any side. Franz Fanon's 'Wretched of the Earth' documents the pervasive power of domination methods as the oppressed identify with the violence of the oppressor and repeat the cycle. Hamas' attack on Israel and Israel's attack on Gaza play out the patterns. The elect that are gathered are those who've been 'called out' of that cycle by a different approach and trust. Maybe.
ReplyDeleteOne of my favorite texts, from the book of Joshua no less (!), about God and "sides" is at the end of c.5, Joshua encounters "a man" with a drawn sword. Joshua asks, "Are you one of us or our adversaries?" to which the man answers, "Neither." It goes on, but that word "neither" stays with me whenever I hear a binary choice between two sides - especially when I have skin in the game.
ReplyDelete