[B-Greek] Mark 10.15: Like a child

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Wed Feb 23 19:25:39 EST 2011


On Feb 23, 2011, at 11:02 AM, Mark Hoffman wrote:

> I'm reviving an old discussion (
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-greek/2002-November/023410.html), but
> I'm coming up with a different solution.
> Mark 10.15: AMHN LEGW hUMIN, hOS AN MH DEXHTAI THN BASILEIAN TOU QEOU hWS
> PAIDION, OU MH EISELQHi EIS AUTHN.
> ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὃς ἂν μὴ δέξηται τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ ὡς παιδίον, οὐ μὴ ε
> ἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτήν.
> 
> The earlier discussion basically involved the rendering of hWS PAIDION and
> whether it meant "like a child" or "child-like." With Carl W. Conrad, I
> really don't see much of a difference...
> BUT I came across this old thread as I was looking for info on this verse
> because I'm wondering whether it would not be better to take PAIDION as an
> accusative rather than a nominative. (The person who started the original
> thread mentioned this but did not pursue this line.)
> As a nominative, the idea is: Whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as
> a child [would receive the kingdom] will never enter it.
> As an accusative: Whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as [one would
> receive] a child will never enter it.
> 
> I'm thinking the accusative is preferable because:
> 
> a) The context is that of Jesus receiving/welcoming children. It makes
> better sense if Jesus receives children and then says that is how one is to
> receive the kingdom. Verse 15 would then be read in complete coherence with
> the previous verse: "Let the little children come to me; do not stop them;
> for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs." >> Ie, if the
> kingdom belongs to children, then just as one receives children one is
> receiving the kingdom of God.
> 
> b) 10.15 now is read in the same way as is explicitly stated in the similar
> scene just prior in 9.37: "Whoever receives/welcomes one such child in my
> name welcomes me..."
> 
> 
> 
> c) Grammatically, I note parallels in Mark w/ passages like:
> 
> 1.10: He saw the heavens splitting and the spirit descending LIKE A DOVE
>            (and the idea is that he saw a spirit/dove, not that "Jesus,
> dove-like, saw the heavens...")
> 
> 8.24: I see people that I see walking LIKE TREES
> 
> 12.31: You will love your neighbor AS YOURSELF
> 
> That is, in each of these instances, the WS clause is related to the object
> of the main clause.
> 
> d) We can avoid all the foolish speculation about what constitutes proper
> child-like acceptance of the kingdom... Of course, we now have a new issue
> of describing how one "receives" a child. This is a bit easier to understand
> given the explicit demonstrations of Jesus in 9.36-37 and here in 10.13ff.
> 
> I think the main reason why the nominative reading has been so dominant is
> because of Matthew 18.3: "Truly I tell you, unless you change and become
> like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." This verse,
> however, should not be the primary key for reading Mark 10.15.
> 
> Am I missing something that would discourage us from reading PAIDION as an
> accusative?

I note that eight hours have passed since the above message was posted. It has
clearly attracted great interest and strong reactions, neither the interest nor the
reactions having yet acquired a voice. So-o-o-o-o-- ... , I've decided it's time
to take a firm stance on the matter! I am of one mind with Professor Hoffman
in thinking that there's no grammatical reason for preferring to understand hWS
PAIDION in the text as nominative rather than accusative. I agree also that 
reading the phrase as an accusative makes the text at least as meaningful as
reading it as a nominative, if not considerably more so. On the other hand,
I don't see single decisive factor giving a heavy preponderance to either 
alternative reading, but I do think that the reading as accusative is quite
appealing.

One thing that keeps going around and around in my mind about this and the
related NT texts, however, is that PAIDION and TEKNON are, I believe,
standard terms for members of a cultic association. Just think of the usage
of these terms in the vocative in 1 John. Then there's Matthew 25:40, where
the term is not PAIDIA but rather ELACISTOI ADELFOI, which seems
to me -- perhaps not to others -- somehow to belong in the same sphere:

ἐφ᾿ ὅσον ἐποιήσατε ἑνὶ τούτων τῶν ἀδελφῶν μου τῶν ἐλαχίστων, 
ἐμοὶ ἐποιήσατε. 
[EF᾿ hOSON EPOIHSATE hENI TOUTWN TWN ADELFWN MOU
 TWN ELACISTWN, EMOI EPOIHSATE.]

And finally, IF guilelessness has anything to do with the supposed
desirable quality of a PAIDION -- and to some it may not seem so,
although it does to me --, then that works just as well if one understands
hWS PAIDION as nominative or accusative; the AGAPH that Jesus 
seeks to foster in his disciples discounts guile as a factor governing
behavior of one person toward another: ACT without guile, TREAT
a person without assuming guile. And if that be thought irrelevant 
to this matter, so be it.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)






More information about the B-Greek mailing list