Below is a rough translation and some preliminary comments regarding Mark
1:1-8, the reading for the second Sunday of Advent in year B. This text seems to gave been worked over a good bit, but remains an excellent introduction to an excellent gospel.
1 Ἀρχὴ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ [υἱοῦ θεοῦ].
A beginning
of the gospel of Jesus Christ [son of God].
1. There is no verb in this verse, hence there is a subject, but no
object. My sense is that it is meant to serve as a title, rather than a first
verse, but that’s pure speculation.
2. There is no definite article for ‘beginning,’ so “a beginning,”
not “the beginning.”
3. “son of God” seems to have been added later by a ‘fixing’
scribe. I am thinking of a document, noted by Bart Ehrman, where one scribe was
weary of a previous scribe’s ‘helpful’ emendations and wrote in the column,
“Fool and knave, stop trying to fix the text!”
4. As pointed out by Clayton N. Croy ("Where the Gospel Text
Begins: A Non-Theological Interpretation of Mark 1:1," Novum
Testamentum, 2001), T.W. Manson, followed 50 years later by John P. Meier,
argue that there are a number of grammatical and syntactical problems with this
pericope. It does seem that these few verses have been worked over pretty well
by scribes and those who added period, capitals, and other indicators
throughout the history of the text.
2 Καθὼς γέγραπται ἐν τῷ Ἠσαΐᾳ τῷ προφήτῃ, Ἰδοὺ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν
μου πρὸ προσώπου σου, ὃς
κατασκευάσει τὴν ὁδόν σου:
Just
as it has been written in the prophet Isaiah, “Behold I send my messenger
before your face, who will prepare your way;
γέγραπται: PerfPI
3s, γράφω, 1) to write, with reference to the
form of the letters
Ἰδοὺ: AMImpv εἶδον, a particle serving to call
attention.
ἀποστέλλω: PAI
1s, ἀποστέλλω, 1) to order (one) to go to a place
appointed
κατασκευάσει: FAI 3s, κατασκευάζω, 1) to furnish, equip, prepare, make ready, 1a)
of one who makes anything ready for a person or thing
1. The particle Καθὼς (just as) makes this a dependent clause.
Manson argues that there is no subsequent main clause, but that has been
rectified by modern translations, such as the NRSV, by omitting the periods at
the end of vv. 2 and 3 (per KJV), thereby making v.4’s “John came” the main
verb of the sentence that begins in v.2. I don’t think the NIV handles this
well at all by putting a period at the end of v.3 and starting v. 4 with “And
so John the Baptist appeared ….” The whole point of the mashup of quotes, as I
see it, is to explain how/why John
appeared, which seems softened by “And so….”
2. The first part of this quote is from Exodus 23:20, not Isaiah: καὶ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου πρὸ
προσώπου σου ἵνα φυλάξῃ σε ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ὅπως εἰσαγάγῃσε εἰς τὴν γῆν ἣν ἡτοίμασά σοι
(LXX), translated by the NRSV as “I am going to send an angel in front of you,
to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared.”
This text refers to the presence (filled with God’s name) that leads Israel
into the Canaan. God also promises to send “terror” and “pestilence” before
them, to drive out the residents so that Israel will not make covenants with
them or serve their gods. The quote is also akin to Malachi 3:1: ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ
ἐξαποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν μου, καὶ ἐπιβλέψεται ὁδὸν πρὸ προσώπου μου, καὶ
ἐξαίφνης ἥξει εἰς τὸν ναὸν ἑαυτοῦ κύριος, ὃν ὑμεῖς ζητεῖτε, καὶ ὁ ἄγγελος τῆς
διαθήκης, ὃν ὑμεῖς θέλετε· ἰδοὺ ἔρχεται, λέγει κύριος παντοκράτωρ, translated
in the NRSV as “See, I am sending my messenger to prepare the way before me,
and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple. The messenger of
the covenant in whom you delight—indeed, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts.”
The messenger in Malachi will come like a refiner’s fire and fuller soap.
3 φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, Ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν κυρίου, εὐθείας ποιεῖτε
τὰς τρίβους αὐτοῦ
A
voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘Prepare the way of the lord, make
straight the path of him,’”
βοῶντος: PAPart gsm, βοάω, 1) to raise a cry, of joy pain etc. 2) to
cry, speak with a high, strong voice 3) to cry to one for help, to
implore his aid.
Ἑτοιμάσατε: AAImpv 2p, ἑτοιμάζω, 1)
to make ready, prepare
ποιεῖτε: PAImpv 2p, ποιέω, 1)
to make
1. Isaiah 40:3 (LXX) reads: φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν
κυρίου εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν, translated in the NRSV as “A
voice cries out: ‘In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord, make straight
in the desert a highway for our God.’” The NRSV is not translating the LXX, but
the Hebrew text, where “In the wilderness” is part of what is cried out and so the
location of where one is to prepare the way. Mark’s Greek text follows
the LXX, which makes “in the wilderness” part of a participial phrase of the
voice’s location.
3. The first imperative, “prepare” is aorist while the second,
“make” is present. In the imperative voice, tenses do not indicate time as much
as aspect. I point this out because I typically think the second part of this
sentence says essentially the same thing as the first, but perhaps there is
more to it than that.
4 ἐγένετο Ἰωάννης [ὁ] βαπτίζων ἐν τῇἐρήμῳ καὶ κηρύσσων βάπτισμα
μετανοίας εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν.
John came,
who was baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance to
forgiveness of sins.
ἐγένετο: AMI 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
βαπτίζων: PAPart nms, βαπτίζω, 1) to
dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge
κηρύσσων: PAPart nms, κηρύσσω, 1)
to be a herald, to officiate as a herald
1. The [ὁ] is not in all of the ancient manuscripts. My guess is
that it was added later, after John’s activity became commonly used as a title,
‘the baptizer.’
2. ‘Baptizing’ and ‘preaching’ are participles with identical case,
number, gender, and tense. That is why I use them similarly, to modify “John”
and each with a predicate.
3. If one puts this whole sentence (vv. 2-4) together, it flows
like this: Just as it is written … John came. Then, what is written (a voice
crying out, a messenger coming to prepare) is aligned with what John is doing
(baptizing and preaching). Contra Manson, as one long sentence, I think these
three verses hold together quite nicely.
4. I decided to follow my own advice from v.2, n.1 and make "John came" into the main verb of vv. 2-4. Mostly I made the period that I had originally placed at the end of v.3 into a comma. So, "Just as [cite OT quotes about the one who prepares], John came, baptizing and preaching." Something like that I think is the flow.
5 καὶ ἐξεπορεύετο πρὸς αὐτὸν πᾶσα ἡ Ἰουδαία χώρα καὶ οἱ Ἱεροσολυμῖται
πάντες, καὶ ἐβαπτίζοντο ὑπ' αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ Ἰορδάνῃ ποταμῷ ἐξομολογούμενοι τὰς ἁμαρτίας
αὐτῶν.
And
all the Judean region and all the Jerusalemites were going out to him, and were
being baptized by him in the Jordan River confessing their sins.
ἐξεπορεύετο: IMI 3s, ἐκπορεύομαι, 1) to go forth, go out, depart 2)
metaph. 2a) to come forth, to issue, to proceed
ἐβαπτίζοντο: IPI 3p, βαπτίζω, 1)
to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk) 2) to
cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to
wash one's self, bathe
ἐξομολογούμενοι: PMPart npm, ἐξομολογέω, 1) to confess 2) to profess
6 καὶ ἦν ὁ Ἰωάννης ἐνδεδυμένος τρίχας καμήλου καὶ ζώνην δερματίνην περὶ τὴν ὀσφὺν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐσθίων ἀκρίδας καὶ μέλι ἄγριον.
And
John was clothing himself with hair of camel and skin belt around his hips, and
eating locusts and wild honey.
ἦν: IAI 3s, εἰμί, 1)
to be, to exist, to happen, to be present
ἐνδεδυμένος: PerfMPart nms, ἐνδύω, 1) to sink into
(clothing), put on, clothe one's self
ἐσθίων:
PAPart nms, ἐσθίω,
1) to eat 2) to eat (consume) a thing 2a) to take food, eat a
meal 3) metaph. to devour, consume
1. I’m not entirely sure how to honor the main verb, ἦν (‘was’, in the imperfect), since it seems to
be serving as a linking verb to a perfect middle participle, making “was … having
been clothing himself.”
2. See II Kings 1:8 where Elijah the
Tishbite is described as “A hairy man, with a leather belt around his
waist.” The use of the middle voice, John was
“clothing himself” may indicate that John was very self-consciously dressing to
fill the role of Elijah. Was John being somewhat theatrical in order to fulfill
his role, or was he simply an ascetic, whose appearance was aligned with
Elijah’s by others?
7 καὶ ἐκήρυσσεν
λέγων, Ἔρχεται ὁ ἰσχυρότερός μου ὀπίσω μου, οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ
ἱκανὸς κύψας λῦσαι
τὸν ἱμάντα τῶν ὑποδημάτων αὐτοῦ:
And
was preaching saying, “One greater than me comes after me, for whom I am not
worthy to loosen the laces of his sandals.
ἐκήρυσσεν: IAI 3s, κηρύσσω, 1) to be a herald, to officiate as a
herald 1a) to proclaim after the manner of a herald
λέγων:
PAPart nsm, λέγω,
1) to say, to speak
Ἔρχεται: PMI 3s, ἔρχομαι, 1)
to come
εἰμὶ: PAI 1s, εἰμί, 1)
to be, to exist, to happen, to be present
λῦσαι: AAInf, λύω, 1)
to loose any person (or thing) tied or fastened
1. These words of John the Baptizer are repeated in all four of the
gospels, as well as in a sermon by Paul in Acts 13:25.
8 ἐγὼ ἐβάπτισα ὑμᾶς ὕδατι, αὐτὸς δὲ βαπτίσει ὑμᾶς ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ.
I
baptize you with water; but he will baptize you in a holy spirit.
ἐβάπτισα: AAI
1s, βαπτίζω, 1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse,
to submerge
βαπτίσει: FAI 3s,
βαπτίζω, 1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse,
to submerge1.
1. The KJV and YLT begin this verse, “I indeed baptize …” because the ἐγὼ (ego: I) is not necessary, given that the
verb is in the 1st person singular. Often, in that case, the ἐγὼ seems to add stress and can be interpreted
as “I indeed.” I suspect that it is not so much intended here to stress the “I”
as much as to set up a parallel construction between “I …, but he …,” since the
whole point of the verse is to subordinate John’s baptism to the baptism of the
coming one.
2. The phrase πνεύματι ἁγίῳ is tricky. In this instance both πνεύματι and ἁγίῳ are in the dative case,
making it rightly ‘in a holy spirit.’ In many other instances in the NT the
word for ‘spirit’ may be nominative/accusative while the word for ‘holy’ will
be genitive, making it ‘spirit of holiness.’ Nonetheless, since “the Holy
Spirit” has been made a point of dogma in the history of the church,
translators often add a definite article, capitalize both words, and ignore any
differences in case that might be in the text.
3. Here, for example, there is no definite article, so “a holy
spirit” not “the Holy Spirit” (as in KJV, YLT, ESV, NIV, and NRSV).
There appears to be a "not this, but that" rhythm. Elijah/John
ReplyDeleteJohn/Jesus
Water/spirit of holiness, which I like set next to repentance to forgiveness of sins. It sounds like a cadence of pairs. It makes me think we might need points of reference to understand new things.
Thanks for your work!
Excellent comment, Anonymous one. Thanks.
DeleteI believe that holy spirit in v. 8 are the instrumental dative. Not that it makes any translation difference.
ReplyDeleteThat ... may be intriguing, Rebecca. I'm not sure what exactly determines that a dative is 'instrumental,' or if that is determined by context. If it is instrumental, that would raise the question of 'to what end?', perhaps suggesting that being baptized in a holy spirit is toward a specific end.
DeleteOut of curiosity, I checked the "fool and knave" marginal comment. It's in Codex Vaticanus, next to Hebrews 1:3.
ReplyDeletehttp://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/Vaticanus/note1512.html
It is one of my favorite scribal stories. I bought a used book once that had some dumb comments written in it by someone who, frankly, would have been happier reading a different book. I wish I had known of this story then, because I would have known what to write in response.
DeleteI meant to get in last week to say, welcome back! I always miss you when you're gone, and when you are able to write, it always enriches my study.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Caryn. That means a lot.
DeletePerhaps the "prophet" the interrogators refer to is the one Moses mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:15? That's generally assumed to be a Messianic prophecy, but perhaps they interpreted it differently...
ReplyDeleteMy 'brush' with 'fool and knavery' I thought Fuller was a brand name
ReplyDeleteMark, I don't quite get what you're saying here:
ReplyDelete"Mark’s Greek text follows the LXX, which makes “in the wilderness” part of a participial phrase of the voice’s location, since the participle ‘crying out’ is in the genitive case, as is ‘wilderness.’"
Of course,ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ is not genitive. Have I missed something?
Rick
No, you have not missed anything. That was a mistake on my part which I have now deleted. Thanks for pointing it out.
DeleteI don't preach from the gospels each Sunday, but when I do, I check out your blog... You challenge me to crank up my Greek knowledge... I minored in the stuff and don't use it nearly enough today...
ReplyDeleteThanks. Blessings. MD
DeleteThe Temple conflict seems to be the right pitch. John baptizes as a reentry into the promised land, drawing the populace away from the sacrifices in the temple for forgiveness. This is economic and political subversion. The temple is the plight upon the people because it has supplanted the reign of God and operates to mollify the reign of Caesar. This gospel could not be clearer about Jesus replacing the temple.
ReplyDeleteRussell, that is really helpful- I hadn't ever made the connection between the temple sacrifice and the repentance called for by John. Revelatory!
DeleteMy other question is why it says that they are baptised and then repent is added. Surely they repented and were baptised?
Can this horrible war on innocents become a way of Israel 'leveling' the path and begin to accept their neighbors as neighbors and treat them such i.e. NEXT DOOR etc. not stuck away behind bunkers etc.
DeleteI made the 2027 comment about contrast with the Temple. To Roberta's question, I see the Baptist as re-enacting the crossing over into the Promised Land. So this Jordan baptism is both forgiveness of the past collective sins of the children of Israel and a turning back to the original covenant of mutual solidarity. And that is the focus of the Baptist's preaching - sharing extra cloak, etc.
DeleteReally missed your great work advent 1. No translation of Mark 13 in archive either.
ReplyDeleteSorry, Bruce. It's there, but I am often stymied by the search tools of this blog site. Try this.
Deletehttps://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/8320313747187588188/4730395054090365094
Or, actually, this:
Deletehttps://leftbehindandlovingit.blogspot.com/2014/11/images-of-hope-suffering-and-vigilance.html
Being perhaps overly sensitive to my LGBQ+ parishioners, can the pathways be made "plain" or perhaps 'plane'??
ReplyDeleteHi Ken,
DeleteYes, in a refined translation one could move away from the language of "straight" as good, not straight as not good. I have always assumed that the point here was a deliberately planned path, like the famous Roman Roads, making transportation easier than winding here and there. However one can capture that meaning works for me.
Looking for but not finding the quote: John's baptizing did, in fact, make quite a splash.
ReplyDelete