[B-Greek] KAQWS

George F Somsel gfsomsel at juno.com
Sat Jun 11 07:32:16 EDT 2005


On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 21:22:12 -0400 "Carl W. Conrad" <cwconrad at ioa.com>
writes:
> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 17:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
> Forwarded for: Richard Richmond <rickr2889 at yahoo.com>
> 
> ARCH TOU EUAGGELIOU IHSOU CRISTOU hUIOU QEOU  KAQWS GEGRAPTAI EN TWi 
>  
> HSA TWi PROFHTHi IDOU APOSTELLW TON AGGELON MOU PRO PROSWPOU SOU hOS 
>  
> KATASKEUASEI THN hODON SOU
> 
> Most translators present the text as though KAQWS were intended to  
> 
> introducea quotation. My position is that it is not so intended but  
> 
> rather compares the good news about Jesus Christ Son of God with the 
>  
> good news found in the prophesy of Isaiah.
> 
> Beginning, the gospel of Jesus Christ as it stands written in Isaiah 
>  
> the prophet
> 
> These are the reasons I translate KAQWS opening lines of Mark as I  
> 
> did in the earlier post. My evidence comes only from the text of 
> Mark  
> itself. I learned long ago that one must look at grammar first and  
> 
> foremost in the document in question. In manuscript work you first  
> 
> have to recreate and record the alphabet of the document as it  
> appears in the hand of the writer before you can begin to work with  
> 
> the text. How anyone else in any other document forms letters or  
> positions words and phrases is of no use whatever. You also have to  
> 
> catalog the various forms and habits used by the scribe. Likewise in 
>  
> a broader scope one must concentrate on the grammar of the writer  
> within the context of his work. It is precisely that sort of frame 
> of  
> reference out of which I discuss Mark’s use of  the compound  
> conjunction KAQWS and also of emphatic words and phrases.
> I can demonstrate his methods over the course of his document not  
> just in one instance with one verse. I would argue that how  
> conjunctions are used elsewhere in the New Testament have little  
> bearing on how Mark uses them.
> 
> I am saying that within the Gospel of Mark there is no other use
> for KAQWS than to compare one thing with another. See
>   for yourself:
> 
> Mar 4:33
> 
> KAI TOIAUTAIS PARABOLAIS POLLAIS ELALEI AUTOIS TON LOGON KAQWS  
> HDUNANTO AKOUEIN
> 
> Mar 9:13
>    ALLA LEGW hUMIN hOTI KAI HLIAS ELHLUQEN KAI EPOIHSAN AUTWi hOSA  
> 
> HQELON KAQWS GEGRAPTAI EP AUTON
> 
> Mar 11:6
> hOI DE EIPAN AUTOIS KAQWS EIPEN hO IHSOUS KAI AFHKAN AUTOUS
> 
> Mar 14:16
> KAI EXHLQON hOI MAQHTAI KAI HLQON EIS THN POLIN KAI hEURON KAQWS  
> EIPEN AUTOIS KAI hHTOIMASAN TO PASCA
> 
> Mar 14:21
> hOTI hO MEN hUIOS TOU ANQRWPOU hUPAGEI KAQWS GEGRAPTAI PERI AUTOU  
> OUAI DE TWi ANQRWPWi EKEINWi DI hOU hO hUIOS TOU ANQRWPOU 
> PARADIDOTAI  
> KALON AUTWi EI OUK EGENNHQH hO ANQRWPOS EKEINOS
> 
> Mar 15:8
> KAI ANABAS hO OCLOS HRXATO AITEISQAI KAQWS EPOIEI AUTOIS
> 
> Mar 16:7
>   ALLA hUPAGETE EIPATE TOIS MAQHTAIS AUTOU KAI TWi PETRWi hOTI  
> PROAGEI hUMAS EIS THN GALILAIAN EKEI AUTON OYESQE KAQWS EIPEN hUMIN
> 
> 
> What sort of argument stands up against the internal evidence of the 
>  
> text of Mark? I can’t think of any that might cause me to think  
> differently on this issue and over many years I have tried.
> 
> Now there does happen to be a instance where the same prophet is  
> actually quoted in Mark.
> 
> 
> Most translators present the text as though KAQWS were intended to  
> 
> introduce
> a quotation in the opening lines of Mark. My position is that it is  
> 
> not so intended but rather compares the good news about Jesus Christ 
>  
> Son of God with the good news found in the prophesy of Isaiah.
> 
> 
> Lets look at a text where Mark actually does cite a passage from 
> Isaiah:
> hO  DE  EIPEN  AUTOIS  KALWS  EPROFHTEUSEN  HSA  PERI  hUMWN  TWN   
> 
> hUPOKRITWN
> And he said to them       well      prophesied  Isaiah  concerning  
> 
> you the hypocrites,
> hWS  GEGRAPTAI  hOTI  hOUTOS hO  LAOS  TOIS CEILESIN  ME  TIMAi  hH  
>  
> DE  KARDIA
> as it has been written [that] this people with the lips honors me 
> but  
> the heart
> AUTWN  PORRW  APECEI  AP  EMOU
> Of them is far away from me
> As you see, when the writer is actually introducing a quotation he  
> 
> uses hWS.
> To go further into that issue one can say that for Mark, the first  
> 
> part of the compound conjunction  KAQWS or kata  signals the  
> progression from the first item of comparison to the second item.   
> 
> When there is no first item, there is not compound comparative  
> conjunction. Again this conclusion bears out when one examines the  
> 
> other occurrences of KAQWS in Mark. I do not want to minimize your  
> 
> right to believe otherwise conserning the text, I merely want to  
> present my case and let the evidence speak for itself. I want to say 
>  
> thank you to all who have participated in this disc ussion 
> concerning  
> the opening lines of the Gospel of Mark.
> 
> 
> Rev. Rick Richmond
> 26652 Osmun,
> Madison Heights MI 48701
> Rickr2889 at yahoo.com
 __________________________________________________

There is one problem with your thesis.  This is not simply KAQWS but
KAQWS GEGRAPTAI.  This combination does seem to introduce a quotation or
a reference to a passage.   While the passage you cited is introduced as
coming from Isaiah, the first part actually comes from the LXX of Ex
23.20

IDOU EGW APOSTELLO TON AGGELON MOU PRO PROSWPOU SOU . . .

It is the second part which comes from the LXX of Is 40.3

FWNH BOWNTOW EN THi ERHMWi hETOIMASATE THN hODON KURIOU, EUQEIAS POIEITE
TAS TRIBOUS TOU QEOU hHMWN

In Mk 9.13 we have the same formula (KAQWS GEGRAPTAI) and might therefore
expect a quotation or a reference to a passage.  If you check your
apparatus in NA-27 you will note that there is no reference given to
which this refers.  In the _Anchor_Bible_Dictionary_ it indicates s.v.
"Elijah (person)"

"A pre-Christian apocalyptic tradition of two messianic precursors may
also explain Elijah’s presence at the Transfiguration (Mark 9:2–8; Matt
17:1–8; Luke 9:28–36). Outside the NT the two forerunners are identified
as Elijah and Enoch, presumably because both had been miraculously
translated to heaven."

Even here, however, we have not indication of any apocryphal literature
from which this might be derived.  Nevertheless, there is likewise other
traditions concerning Elijah such as appears in the Seder where a place
is set for Elijah.  I would be inclined to think that our author was in
fact referring to some written tradition concerning Elijah which we no
longer have.

In summary, while KAQWS by itself does indicate simply a comparison,
KAQWS GEGRAPTAI indicates a comparison to a written source (even if we no
longer have that source).

george
gfsomsel
___________


More information about the B-Greek mailing list