[B-Greek] Follow up to Oppiso

George F Somsel gfsomsel at juno.com
Mon Jun 20 21:17:54 EDT 2005


On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 15:55:08 -0700 (PDT) Richard Richmond
<rickr2889 at yahoo.com> writes:
> 
> I think you are giving too much theological
> significance to the adv OPISW.  If you note Mk 8.33 //
> Mt 16.23
>  
> hO DE STRAFEIS EIPEN TWi PETRWi, hUPAGE OPISW MOU,
> SATANA; SKANDALON EI EMOU.
>  
> I think you must agree that it does not carry the
> concept of suffering.
>  
> george
> gfsomsel
> 
> 
> Reponse
> 
> As presented in my first post, in Mark there is the
> contrast of the call response from Andrew and Peter vs
> that of James and John where OPISW is used to describe
> the reponse of the sons of Zebedee. Matthew does not
> copy OPISW as he presents the response of the Zebedees
> as does Mark
>   
> The repsonse in Mark's narrative favors the notion
> that James and John followed more correctly in
> discipleship than did Peter. The tradition of Matthew
> is much kinder to Peter than the first Gopsel. Mark
> implies that Peter is the Rock like soil, that does
> not produce fruit while Matthew wants to say that
> Peter is the Rock upon which Christ wished to build
> the church. OPISW is clearly loaded with symbolism in
> the Gospel of Mark. John predicted that a stronger
> would come OPISW him. Jesus followed in John's
> footsteps then makes OPISW the descriptive of how
> everyone who wants ot be a disciple should relate to
> him (Jesus).  How can you say that OPISW does not
> imply suffering when suffering is the entire thrust of
> the pericope that is formed around this Greek Adverb? 
> 
> The subject of the entire saying is  EI TIS QELEI
> OPISW MOU I think it is difficult to make to much of
> the key word in this saying, a saying that puts a
> premium on suffering and martyrdom. The thrust of the
> saying is that it takes Peter's rejection of the
> thought of Jesus suffering and makes suffering the
> goal of anyone who wishes to follow Jesus. I am not
> saying that this is theologically sound only that it
> is Mark's key point.
> 
> 
> The two times Jesus uses OPISW with respect to Peter
> it s acompanied by an imparetive. Mark's character,
> Peter, ovioulsy wants to be in the front making
> decisions as in Mark 1:36 And Simon and those who were
> with him pursued him, 37 and they found him and said
> to him, "Every one is searching for you."
> 
> DEUTE OPISW MOU in 1:17 an exciting invitation is
> replaced in 8:33 by hUPAGE OPISW MOU SATANA and
> intensive imperative followed by derrogatory epithet
> that amounts to a curse. Instead of allowing Jesus to
> make him a fisher of men Peter has become SATAN
> according to the text of Mark. And all because he
> rejects the concept of suffering.
> 
> George we are going to have to just disagree on the
> implications of OPISW in Mark. Thank you for your
> commments.
> 
> Rick Richmond 
______________

OPISW has the sense of being behind, nothing more or less.  Any
significance must be ascribed to the verb with which it is used.  In 1.7
it is ERXOMAI; in 1.17 DEUTE is used in a sense similar to AKOLOUQEW or
APERXOMAI; in 1.20 it is APERXOMAI.  In 8.33 hUPAGW is used in a sense
antithetical to AKOLOUQEW  or APERXOMAI.  In 8.34 we are again introduced
to AKOLOUQEW in combination with OPISW.  How to you intend to relate it
to EPISTREFW OPISW in 13.16.  It seems to me that the more significant
word is the verb.

george
gfsomsel
___________



More information about the B-Greek mailing list