From: Stephen Carlson (
Date: Tue Nov 14 1995 - 16:48:46 EST

I haven't seen any replies to this, but there have been computer
problems last week, so I apologize in advance if I am retreading
old ground.

Edgar M. Krentz wrote:
> The question is complicated by the context, since v.41 sys that Jesus had
> pity on the man (SPLAGXNISQEIS). The western text tradition, representedby
> Codex D and the Latin MSS a ff2 r1 reprent both one Old Latin and two Vg
> Mss reads ORGISQEIS instead of EMBRIMIHSAMENOS, apparently to remove the
> conflict with v. 43.

I think that more consideration needs to be given to the Western
reading. From a source critical perspective, I frankly can't see
how both Matthew and Luke would agree to remove SPLAGXNISQEIS, since
Matthew includes it even where Mark does not (20:34, cf. Mk10:52),
and Luke uses it to describe Jesus in his own special material (7:13).
On the other hand, while Mark does not use ORGISQEIS to describe Jesus
elsewhere, he did use MET' ORGHS at 3:5, which is lacking in the other
parallels (Mt12:13 Lk6:10).

ORGISQEIS fits the context better(*), and its harsh description of
Jesus, which Matthew and Luke do not include, may well be a "harder
reading" which was smoothed to SPLAGXNISQEIS. If ORGISQEIS is the
correct reading here, then EMBRIMHSAMENOS presents little difficulty.

Stephen Carlson

(*) I'm aware that fitting the context better is also an argument
for being less original (i.e., an "easier reading"), but we need to
consider the whole picture.

Stephen Carlson     :  Poetry speaks of aspirations,  : ICL, Inc.  :  and songs chant the words.     : 11490 Commerce Park Dr.
(703) 648-3330      :                 Shujing 2:35    : Reston, VA  22091   USA

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:32 EDT