From: Carl W. Conrad (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Sep 10 1996 - 06:25:16 EDT
At 10:40 PM -0500 9/9/96, Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
>I've been looking at Mk1:24=Lk4:34 TI hHMIN KAI SOI. It's already
>an interesting idiom in its own right, but I would like to hear any
>comments as to why it's using the *plural* first person pronoun.
>There is only one man, possessed by one unclean spirit, which is
>doing the talking (cf. however, "Legion" and the herd of swine).
>It would be easy to attribute the awkwardness of the shift to the
>plural to Mark's Greek, but Luke, who's pretty good, has it as well.
>Did the plural mean that the unclean spirit was talking for both
>itself and the possessee? What's going on here?
I have always supposed that the unclean spirit speaks generically for all
the minions of Satan. I don't know where I first got this notion, but I
think it may have been quite some time ago from a book or long article by
James M. Robinson on Mark's historical perspective. This is, I think, the
first Marcan confrontation with a figure from the demonic realm (apart from
Satan, of course, in Mark's very brief 2-verse temptation narrative). And I
would certainly make the assumption that Luke takes over the plural from
Mark's version (or proto-Mark, if you prefer that notion).
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
firstname.lastname@example.org OR email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:51 EDT