Page 1 of 1

Mark 9:48 ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ

Posted: January 31st, 2015, 2:23 pm
by Stephen Hughes
ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ, καὶ τὸ πῦρ οὐ σβέννυται.
It seems widely claimed that σκώληξ is specifically a "fly maggot". Is that actually true or just a well-meaning but ignorant assertion.

It seems to be a wholesale borrowing / superimposition of the meaning of εὐλή onto σκώληξ, which LSJ is not so specific and that it is common to introduce worms into compost heaps to help in the break down of various forms of waste.

In regard to the comment in the definitions volume of L&N 4.57 (page 47) "intestinal worms" are ἕλμινς, -ινθος, ἡ (cf. ἑλμινθιᾶν, "suffer from worms"), and "maggots" (meat-eating), are more generally εὐλή, while σκώληξ is a more general word considering / taking into account the creatures' shape / movement patterns rather than their diet (cf. σκωληκίζειν, "wriggle like a worm"). Extra to their three types of worms, we could also mention a fourth ἴψ "wood worm" (mentioned as being in vines), (cf. τερηδών "wood worm", and other type of grubs that destroy things).

Further words about worms can be found here in the LSJ search. Perhaps ἀσκαρίς is a specific type of intestinal worm.

Cf. Other related words (Actually, now that I look at this again before posting, they are perhaps not very related, but ... being here, they may as well stay.)
βόμβυξ, -υκος, ὁ, silk-worm
μέλισσα , ἡ, bee
ἀγριομέλισσα , ἡ, bumble-bee (with this word I prefer the evidence from Mod. Greek over LSJ)
μελισσών, -ῶνος, ὁ, bee-house, apiary
κυψέλη , ἡ, bee-hive [preferable to κυψέλιον, τό]
(μελίσσιον) κηρίον, τό, honeycomb
σφήξ, σφηκός, ὁ, wasp
φωλεά, ἡ, hive (esp. of flying insects) (σφηκοφωλεά = φωλεά τῶν σφηκῶν, and μύρμηκοφωλεά = φωλεά τῶν μύρμηκῶν = (the less preferable) μυρμηδών)
ἐμπίς, -ίδος, ἡ, a small flying insect, mosquito, gnat.
οἶστρος, gad-fly. (A problem for cattle)
ἴξ is called a worm, but from the description, it sounds like a little caterpillar.
κάμπη, caterpillar (the crooked shape of it)
κραμβίς , -ίδος, ἡ cabbage-caterpillar

Re: Mark 9:48 ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ

Posted: February 1st, 2015, 10:23 am
by Barry Hofstetter
Jerome translates with vermis, "worm," the type of which can apparently inhabit dung:

quippe videre licet vivos existere vermes
stercore de taetro


Lucretius. (12/5/03). De Rerum Natura. Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library.

Sounds a bit maggoty to me...

σκώληξ, ηκος, ὁ (Hom. et al.; SEG XXVIII, 1586; LXX; TestJob, ApcEsdr; Jos., Ant. 3, 30; Tat. 3, 2) worm 1 Cl 25:3 (on σκ. and the phoenix s. GrBar 6:12; Artem. 4, 47 p. 229, 14). Symbol of insignificance and wretchedness (Maximus Tyr. 15, 8d; Lucian, Vit. Auct. 27) 1 Cl 16:15 (Ps 21:7; cp. Epict. 4, 1, 142). Acc. to Is 66:24 a never-dying worm shall torment the damned (cp. Jdth 16:17; Sir 7:17) Mk 9:43 [44] v.l., 45 [46] v.l., 48; 2 Cl 7:6; 17:5. Cp. the σκώληκες ApcPt 10:25 (s. σκωληκόβρωτος). Papias (3:2).—B. 194. New Docs 3, 83 (s. SEG above).—DELG. M-M. TW.

Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 933). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.



σκώληξ 4663
“a worm” (MGr σκουλήκι, σκωλήκι), comes from the same root as σκέλος: the linking notion is the meaning “bind,” “twist” (Boisacq p. 882). For the metaph. use in Mk 9:48 LXX (cf. Sir 7:16, Judith 16:17) we may compare Apoc. Petr. 10 ἐπέκειντο δὲ αὐτοῖς σκώληκες ὥσπερ νεφέλαι σκότους. See also Teles p. 313 κατορυχθέντα ὑπὸ σκωλήκων.


Moulton, J. H., & Milligan, G. (1930). The vocabulary of the Greek Testament (p. 580). London: Hodder and Stoughton.

Re: Mark 9:48 ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ

Posted: February 1st, 2015, 4:06 pm
by Wes Wood
Barry Hoffstetter wrote:Jerome translates with vermis, "worm," the type of which can apparently inhabit dung:
The first thing that flashed into my mind when I read this was a collection of memories about childhood fishing trips. For many years my family owned cattle and in one of our three pastures we had a small pond stocked with catfish. When my brothers and I wanted to go fishing we would kick over the "cow pies" and (after putting on sterile gloves, of course... :lol: ) pick out the white, redheaded "worms" to use as bait.

This discussion makes me suspect that a definitive answer to this question can't be obtained. I would always wonder if one man's "worm" is another's variant of Cyclocephala. If you scroll just a hair down on the page in the link below you can see the white "worms" (grubs) that I am referring to. They will later become beetles, assuming they don't end up on a hook or in a catfish like ours did.

http://nematodeinformation.com/tag/steinernema-glaseri

Re: Mark 9:48 ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ

Posted: February 2nd, 2015, 10:30 am
by Barry Hofstetter
The ancients simply didn't make scientific distinctions, and rarely even made technical distinctions. To them, a worm was worm, and I doubt that Mark was worried about the specific species. The point is perfectly clear... You don't want to be in the place where the worms don't die!

Re: Mark 9:48 ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ

Posted: February 2nd, 2015, 10:56 am
by Wes Wood
Barry Hofstetter wrote:The ancients simply didn't make scientific distinctions, and rarely even made technical distinctions. To them, a worm was worm, and I doubt that Mark was worried about the specific species.
I was working from the stated assumption that perhaps the author did not wish to specify such a specific creature or category of creature, and my intended point was that I don't have confidence that he (or many of us for that matter) would be able to distinguish a worm from different insect larval forms even if that were what he wished to do.

Re: Mark 9:48 ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ

Posted: February 2nd, 2015, 11:27 am
by cwconrad
Wes Wood wrote:
Barry Hoffstetter wrote:Jerome translates with vermis, "worm," the type of which can apparently inhabit dung:
The first thing that flashed into my mind when I read this was a collection of memories about childhood fishing trips. For many years my family owned cattle and in one of our three pastures we had a small pond stocked with catfish. When my brothers and I wanted to go fishing we would kick over the "cow pies" and (after putting on sterile gloves, of course... :lol: ) pick out the white, redheaded "worms" to use as bait.

This discussion makes me suspect that a definitive answer to this question can't be obtained. I would always wonder if one man's "worm" is another's variant of Cyclocephala. If you scroll just a hair down on the page in the link below you can see the white "worms" (grubs) that I am referring to. They will later become beetles, assuming they don't end up on a hook or in a catfish like ours did.

http://nematodeinformation.com/tag/steinernema-glaseri
Wes' instructive anecdote on baiting the fishing hook with worms drawn from cow-pies reminds me of an admonition of Aristotle to be found somewhere (I don't remember exactly where -- or the wording of it) in De Partibus Animalium. It went something like this: "Don't look down on this task of dissecting specimens of these lowly creatures; bear in mind that God is to be found everywhere, even in the entrails of a fish."