An accusative absolute ? [Mk 3, 15var] [W 032]

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

The infinitive constructions are after ἐξουσία not δοῦναι.

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Richard Budelberger wrote:My understanding was (since 2006… when I first studied W) was :

  ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν
            θεραπεύειν τὰς νόσους
      καὶ ἐκβάλλειν τὰ δαιμόνια
      καὶ
            περιάγοντας
            κηρύσσειν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον,

that is

  he gave them power
             to heal sicknesses,
      and to cast out devils
      and,
            [while] going about,
            to preach the gospel.
I understand the problem that is being considered here in a couple of different ways to what has been discussed here already.

The infinitives come after ἐξουσία not δοῦναι, so I don't see that a possible subject of the infinitive could ever have been referred to in the dative. It could just as well have been constructed with another verb and the dative wouldn't have even been considered - ἔσχον ἐξουσίαν θεραπεύειν ... The verb δοῦναι takes and accusative and a dative and that's where the dative stops. The noun ἐξουσία (in this type of construction) takes an infinitive. That is no problem. In fact, it takes the infinitive a reasonable number of times in the New Testament
  • (Mt 9:6, Mt. 10:1, Mk 2:10, Mk 3:15, Lk 5:24, Lk 9:1, Lk 12:5, Jn 1:2, Jn 5:24, Jn 10:18, Jn 19:10, Acts 9:14, Rom 9:21, 1 Cor 9:4, 1 Cor 9:5, 1 Cor 9:6, Heb 13:10, Rv 6:8, Rv 9:10, Rv 11:6, Rv 13:5)
Which as far as I can see those instances only have the infinitive or the infinitive + object. That is to say that they don't have the infinitive + subject. That then is the possible problem; can the word ἐξουσία take an infinitive with its subject (and object)?

1) If it can, then the explanation that others have given may be okay.

2) If it can not, then perhaps ἔδωκεν ... δαιμόνια is to be taken parenthetically, in which case κηρύσσειν can be taken as a repetition after the ἵνα ἀποστέλλῃ αὐτοὺς κηρύσσειν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, of the previous verse; i.e.
  • ἵνα ἀποστέλλῃ αὐτοὺς
    • κηρύσσειν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον,
    • καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν
      • θεραπεύειν τὰς νόσους
        καὶ ἐκβάλλειν τὰ δαιμόνια
    • καὶ περιάγοντας κηρύσσειν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον,
"that he might appoint them to proclaim the Gospel [where they were] (and he gave them power to heal diseases and expel demons) and to proclaim the Gospel itinerantly."

The addition may suggest that this version comes after when the apostles had gone to the places that tradition suggests that they had gone to.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Richard Budelberger
Posts: 6
Joined: March 26th, 2014, 4:05 pm
Location: Near Paris (France)
Contact:

Re: Perhaps you mean Thaddeus?

Post by Richard Budelberger »

Stephen Hughes wrote:I realise it is perhaps trivial, but...
No.
Richard Budelberger wrote:Note : in W, the Twelve are… eleven – and (cf. Mk 16, 14 l. 5) twelve (Ι̅Β) soon after Jesus’ death… –, and this group of 11 has a nickname : “Boananerge, the Sons of Thunder” !
ἐποίησεν δώδεκα μαθητὰς, κοινῶς δὲ αὐτοὺς ἐκάλεσεν Βοανανηργε, ὅ ἐστιν Υἱοὶ Βροντῆς· ἦσαν δὲ οὗτοι ① Σίμων καὶ ② Ἀνδρέας, ③ Ἰάκωβος καὶ ④ Ἰωάννης, ⑤ Φίλιππος καὶ ⑥ Βαρθολομαῖος, καὶ ⑦ Μαθθαῖος, καὶ ⑧ Θωμᾶς, καὶ ⑨ Ἰάκωβος ὁ τοῦ Ἁλφαίου, καὶ ⑩ Σίμων ὁ Καναναῖος καὶ ⑪ Ἰούδας Ἰσκαριώτης ὁ καὶ παραδοὺς αὐτόν
That’s because omitting, forgetting, hiding, deleting, the other Ἀνδρέας…)
Stephen Hughes wrote:Perhaps Thaddeus?
No, Ἀνδρέας, the other Ἀνδρέας, in my own opinion : Ἰησοῦς’ brother.
Mark 3:18 (PR2005) wrote:καὶ Ἀνδρέαν, καὶ Φίλιππον, καὶ Βαρθολομαῖον, καὶ Ματθαῖον, καὶ Θωμᾶν, καὶ Ἰάκωβον τὸν τοῦ Ἀλφαίου, καὶ Θαδδαῖον, καὶ Σίμωνα τὸν Κανανίτην
You and me know that the Gospels (The New Testament) were written, rewritten and “corrected” along the first years of Christianism – less of Marcion and more of “Luke” in Luke, this Gospel of the Lord revisited –, until this garbage of Byzantine Text (or the Peshitta against the Vetus Syriaca…). The Institution of the Twelve e. g. among others is a very problematic passage of the Gospels ; here, in W, we have only eleven Apostles, in D and d, the text is inconsistent, lacking a verb (ἐποίησεν, fecit), and, listing all Apostles’ names in the accusative form – agreeing with the missing verb –, except the last one, ΪΟΥΔΑΣ, iudas (last line), still nominatives, as in W !…
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: An accusative absolute ? [Mk 3, 15var] [W 032]

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Richard Budelberger wrote:You and me know that the Gospels (The New Testament) were written, rewritten and “corrected” along the first years of Christianism  – less of Marcion and more of “Luke” in Luke, this Gospel of the Lord revisited –, until this garbage of Byzantine Text (or the Peshitta against the Vetus Syriaca…). The Institution of the Twelve e. g. among others is a very problematic passage of the Gospels ; here, in W, we have only eleven Apostles, in D and d, the text is inconsistent, lacking a verb (ἐποίησεν, fecit), and, listing all Apostles’ names in the accusative form – agreeing with the missing verb –, except the last one, ΪΟΥΔΑΣ, iudas (last line), still nominatives, as in W !… Falsifying an original text is a hard work that forgers are unable to achieve without traces. (See also e. g. what Mark Goodacre calls « the missing middle ».) And so on, etc.
I'm able to discuss the grammar of either text you want to cite, or the constructions used in the text. Here I can recognise that there is a different logic being used to choose tenses in the narative than is usual in other Greek of the period I've read, but I'm unable to find a consistent pattern.

I UNDERSTAND that redaction was part of the transmission process, but I'm not trained in it. It seems that the Byzantine text has the most idiomatic Greek, don't you think. The scribes probably had a good command of the language. I that that is a generally positive thing.


As for missing verbs, the simplest restoration is usually the correct one. In my experience at some stage of acquiring a new language, students leave out a lot of simple things which they otherwise used to write. Big or complex verbs are more often written, perhaps because they require concentration.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: An accusative absolute ? [Mk 3, 15var] [W 032]

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

cwconrad wrote:[Okay, we have two ablative-absolute constructions here, illo exercitum vel per senatum vel per tribunos obtinente and illo patiente atque obtinente provinciam, neither of them problematic, so far as I can see. However, this forum is for discussion of Greek syntax and grammar; let's not get more deeply involved in a discussion of Latin usage.
I am constitutionally incapable of NOT making a comment here. Carl, as one would expect, is right, there is absolutely nothing wrong with Caesar's use of the two ablatives absolute here. In fact, they are wonderful "textbook" examples (as it were) of the construction. I also agree that as parallel as the ablative absolute is to the Greek genitive absolute, a discussion of Latin grammar does little to help us with how a Greek author might use the GA...
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Perhaps you mean Thaddeus?

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

Richard Budelberger wrote:You and me know that the Gospels (The New Testament) were written, rewritten and “corrected” along the first years of Christianism – less of Marcion and more of “Luke” in Luke, this Gospel of the Lord revisited –, until this garbage of Byzantine Text (or the Peshitta against the Vetus Syriaca…). The Institution of the Twelve e. g. among others is a very problematic passage of the Gospels ; here, in W, we have only eleven Apostles, in D and d, the text is inconsistent, lacking a verb (ἐποίησεν, fecit), and, listing all Apostles’ names in the accusative form – agreeing with the missing verb –, except the last one, ΪΟΥΔΑΣ, iudas (last line), still nominatives, as in W !…
As a point of order, please remember that B-Greek is not about issues of textual criticism, higher criticism or theology. It is about discussing issues of grammar and syntax as the text is presented. In order to promote good communication and scholarly discourse, we also advocate respectful or at the very least neutral discussion of the text, since there are people of widely differing and strong opinions on these subjects. Please bear these principles in mind as you compose future contributions to the forum.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Richard Budelberger
Posts: 6
Joined: March 26th, 2014, 4:05 pm
Location: Near Paris (France)
Contact:

Re: Perhaps you mean Thaddeus?

Post by Richard Budelberger »

Barry Hofstetter wrote:
Richard Budelberger wrote:You and me know that the Gospels (The New Testament) were written, rewritten and “corrected” along the first years of Christianism – less of Marcion and more of “Luke” in Luke, this Gospel of the Lord revisited –, until this garbage of Byzantine Text (or the Peshitta against the Vetus Syriaca…). The Institution of the Twelve e. g. among others is a very problematic passage of the Gospels ; here, in W, we have only eleven Apostles, in D and d, the text is inconsistent, lacking a verb (ἐποίησεν, fecit), and, listing all Apostles’ names in the accusative form – agreeing with the missing verb –, except the last one, ΪΟΥΔΑΣ, iudas (last line), still nominatives, as in W !…
As a point of order, please remember that B-Greek is not about issues of textual criticism, higher criticism or theology. It is about discussing issues of grammar and syntax as the text is presented. In order to promote good communication and scholarly discourse, we also advocate respectful or at the very least neutral discussion of the text, since there are people of widely differing and strong opinions on these subjects. Please bear these principles in mind as you compose future contributions to the forum.
The issue in the above remark is not about the missing verb (ἐποίησεν, fecit) in D d – a “missing middle” example –, but about the name ΪΟΥΔΑΣ, iudas in the nominative form – cf. W… – not agreeing with the missing verb, as do the eleven other names (in the accusative form). Maybe someone would say that ΪΟΥΔΑΣ, iudas is a kind of accusative, because of assimilation with the following Σ s of Skarioth…
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Perhaps you mean Thaddeus?

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

Richard Budelberger wrote:The issue in the above remark is not about the missing verb (ἐποίησεν, fecit) in D d – a “missing middle” example –, but about the name ΪΟΥΔΑΣ, iudas in the nominative form – cf. W… – not agreeing with the missing verb, as do the eleven other names (in the accusative form). Maybe someone would say that ΪΟΥΔΑΣ, iudas is a kind of accusative, because of assimilation with the following Σ s of Skarioth…
And using words like "garbage" to describe the Byzantine text type is what I was calling attention to. As to your question/observation, that's actually kind of interesting, and might explain the scribal variation. With that, however, I would be careful about drawing any major conclusions based on the presence of a variant. Still, I don't think anyone would have identified it as an accusative. I think they would have looked at and said, "Oh, he wrote a sigma when he should have written a nu.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
RandallButh
Posts: 1105
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: An accusative absolute ? [Mk 3, 15var] [W 032]

Post by RandallButh »

And using words like "garbage" to describe the Byzantine text type is what I was calling attention to.
Yes, perjorative appellations are not helpful.
The Byzantine text-type is one of the major, reliable witnesses to the NT text and the one that was in place in the areas where Greek was the mother-tongue. There are numerous places where it preserves the original text. Over the years I've become less enthralled with the Alexandrian text-type and treat it as 'edited' rather than 'neutral'. The truth is on a boat somewhere between Alexandria and Rhodes, perhaps after having put in to Caesarea for supplies.
Post Reply

Return to “Syntax and Grammar”