[b-greek] RE: IORDANH POTAMW

From: Iver Larsen (iver_larsen@sil.org)
Date: Tue Dec 04 2001 - 17:14:52 EST


> In Matthew 3:6 and Mk 1:5 we have either
> IORDANH POTAMW or
> IORDANH alone:
> KAI EBAPTIZONTO EN TW IORDANH POTAMW UP AUTOU
> KAI EBAPTIZONTO EN TW IORDANH UP AUTOU
>
> Is there a difference? Or, when/why do you add POTAMW?
> In the Bible IORDANH POTAMW is the more unusual phrase, normally
> it appears as IORDANHS alone.
>
> Compare the previous verse:
> Matthew 3:5 TOTE EXEPOREUETO PROS AUTON IEROSOLUMA KAI PASA H
> IOUDAIA KAI PASA H PERICWROS TOU IORDANOU,
>
> Is it possible that POTAMW has been added to distinguish the
> river from the region?
>
> Any thoughts?

Whether POTAMW is there or not, the phrase clearly refers to the Jordan
river. There could be a different nuance. The Jordan River is often used as
a demarcation line to separate the region on this side from the region on
the other side. With this use the river as a mass of water is not in focus.
But when the topic is baptism, water is in focus, and therefore I would
expect the original text to have included POTAMWi which was then dropped in
some later mss because of the common form without POTAMOS. The later
references to baptism in the Jordan river in Matt 3:13 and Mark 1:9 do not
need the word POTAMOS because it is still in the contextual background from
a few verses before.

My thoughts,
Iver Larsen


---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:13 EDT