[B-Greek] KAQWS GEGRAPTAI
Carl Conrad
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Sat Jun 11 12:43:30 EDT 2005
Forwarded for: Richard Richmond <rickr2889 at yahoo.com>
Date: June 11, 2005 12:28:12 PM EDT
George Gfsomsel wrote:
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
KAQWS GEGRAPTAI
In this instance the perfect tense refers to the fact that what has
happened and recorded in Mark’s text is complete and has happened
before and been recorded completely in Isaiah’s text “The good news”
is complete and to be found in both places. What Mark has written
(the Gospel of Jesus Christ Son of God) is the first part of the
comparison the second part is what stands written in Isaiah. In play
format the audience would have seen the text of Isaiah 40:9 on a
Tableau, a giant page on wheels. Likewise and more importantly for
this discussion; if you go through the scroll of Isaiah from front to
back you will find the first occurrence of EUAGGELIZOMENOS at Isaiah
40:9. Which is as I contend, exactly what is indicated in the text
of Mark and therefore what the writer wants you to find. His issue
at hand is the destruction of Jerusalem. If you follow his prologue
you will arrive at Isaiah 40. This passage is key to what Mark has to
say, as it was to the Qumran community.
Isaiah 40:9
EP OROS hUYHLON ANABHQI hO EUAGGELIZOMENOS SIWN hUYWSON THi ISCUI THN
FWNHN SOU hO EUAGGELIZOMENOS IEROUSALHM hUYWSATE MH FOBEISQE EIPON
TAIS POLESIN IOUDA IDOU hO QEOS hUMWN
===============================================================
Point 2
IDOU EGW APOSTELLO TON AGGELON MOU PRO PROSWPOU SOU . . .
It is the second part which comes from the LXX of Is 40.3
I am not sure what you mean here George the above text is not in
Isaiah 40:3
The second part of Mark’s statement (if that is what you mean) in
direct address (my understanding of the text) is:
FWNH BOWNTOS EN THi ERHMWi hETOIMASATE THN hODON KURIOU EUQEIAS
POIEITE TAS
a voice of one crying/shouting in the desert prepare you the way of
the lord and straight
TRIBOUS AUTOU
make the paths of him.
In the original post I explained this matter. I do not regard “Behold
I send my messenger etc.as a quotation or an attempt a quoting but as
direct address to the reader. Likewise the lines above this paragraph
continuing the direct address and following the pattern of Isaiah
represented by Mark’s use of the perfect tense in the opening line,
he like Isaiah, cries out for the preparation for the way of the Lord.
The FWNH BOWNTOS EN THi ERHMWi etc. is a quoted passage with no
citation, it serves the writer as a current statement following the
pattern set forth in Isaiah chapter 40. What Mark has to say is to
the writer just as the message of Isaiah in chapter 40. His message
relates to the destruction of Jerusalem the subject of Isaiah 40.
This is the very heart of the matter pointed to in the opening
statement of the Gospel. He seeks to answer the question where was
God in this terrible event. Mark's response from his reference to
Isaiah and the verse that contains the "Gospel" is IDOU hO QEOS hUMWN
====================================================================
IDOU EGW APOSTELLO TON AGGELON MOU PRO PROSWPOU SOU
Mark's use of the imperative here, direct address (as I argue) is due
to the fact that the document - except for the part designations
(Chorus, Leader, first,and second actors etc.) has the exact form of
a trilogy of plays like those entered in competition at Greek
Theaters during the period. This is not the forum to discuss this so
I will address the issue from the point of the Greek text.
Mark is aware of the passages associated with his direct address in
the Exodus text, in Malachi and in Isaiah (all are presented here).
I am sure he has them in mind but his structure indicates that he
intends to use the statement about sending his messenger as though he
were announcing the beginning of a play or advance of his document to
a intended recipient. Performed or in written form, his document will
be sent to the angel of each of the other churches. Angel being the
one who can read and write.The same use of AGGELON can be found in
the opening chapter of Revelation.
He refers to his written message as his angel (messenger) which he is
sending or (being performed in play format) PROSWPOU before the face
of his reader or audience. PROSWPOU is a clue to the nature of the
document. It is the exact word for the mask the actors would wear in
the play. We can verify Mark’s understanding of this word by the
fact that he makes use of the antonym in a powerful way in his text;
that being OPISW. This word was used in Greek Theater to indicate the
face behind the mask. The text in question when seen as direct
address functions effectively either in text or play form, On the one
hand it would be before the face of the reader in the community on
the other hand it will be before the face of his audience.
========================================================================
Exodus:
KAI IDOU EGW APOSTELLW TON AGGELON MOU PRO PROSWPOU SOU hINA FULAXHi
SE EN
And behold I send my messenger before your face in ord er that he may
keep you in
THi hODWi
The way
Mark does not duplicate Exodus or Malachi in his text, he is thinking
like the Essenes and the Gospel of Luke about preparing a people not
keeping them in the way. This is not what Mark has said in his text
nor do I accept the theory that it is a misquote.
He wrote what he intended to say. We first have to let the text say
what it says to learn what it means. Mark does not quote Exodus and I
maintain that the writer is not so confused as to mistake the Book of
Law for the prophesy of Isaiah. Nor does he have such problems with
grammar that he cannot quote Malachi and get the person of the
pronoun correct.
IDOU EGW EX APOSTELLW TON AGGELON MOU KAI EPIBLEYETAI hODON
Behold I send out the messenger of me and he shall survey the way
before me
PRO PROSWPOU MOU
Before the face of me
FWNH BOWNTOW EN THi ERHMWi hETOIMASATE THN hODON KURIOU, EUQEIAS
POIEITE TAS TRIBOUS TOU QEOU hHMWN
paths of our God
========================================================================
=====
George wrote:
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)"
Lets look at that text:
ALLA LEGW hUMIN hOTI KAI HLIAS ELHLUQEN KAI EPOIHSAN AUTWi hOSA
HQELON KAQWS
But I tell you that indeed Elijah has come and they did to him what
they wished just as
GEGRAPTAI EP AUTON
Stands written of him
The disciples are referring to a prophesy about the return of Elijah
to put it in context.
This would be the second coming of Elijah not the first and in Mark
1:6 We have the identifying attire of Elijah on John the Baptist:
KAI HN hO IWANNHS ENDEDUMENOS TRICAS KAMHLOU KAI ZWNHN DERMATINHN
PERI THN OSFUN
IN 9:13 what comes before the conjunction KAQWS is what they did to
him what comes after is what was written about it. You are correct,
he does not cite the reference just like in 1:1. Mark indicates that
something has been written regarding John rather than the Elijah we
know from the old testament who was “translated to heaven.”
Perhaps Mark is referring to the source for the story behind his
narrative of John’s death which has already been presented.
Note the narrator’s account of the statement that was made by the
disciples who buried John’s body when they returned to Jesus.
KAI SUNAGONTAI hOI APOSTOLOI PROS TON IHSOUN KAI APHGGEILAN AUTWi
PANTA hOSA EPOIHSAN KAI hOSA EDIDAXAN (another reference to what they
did to John as I read the text) The disciples who buried John are the
same diciples who report to Jesus) an interesting point on many
levels but another subject.
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).
I agree with you except that it is not Elijah but his messianic
counterpart that is in question. And in the case of John's death, we
only have Mark’s account.
Thank you George
Richard Richmond
Discover Yahoo!
Find restaurants, movies, travel & more fun for the weekend. Check it
out!
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list