Mark 3:16-19: what a strange construction!
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Wed Jan 8 07:20:38 EST 2003
At 6:56 AM -0500 1/8/03, Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:
>I am reading Mark. This time it goes well. I hope to finish it this time
>Mark 3:16 - 19:
>[KAI EPOIHSEN TOUS DWDEKA]
>(1) KAI EPEQHKEN ONOMA TWi SIMONI PETRON,
>(2a) KAI IAKWBON TON TOU ZEBEDAIOU KAI OWANNHN TON ADELFOU TOU IAKWBOU
> (2b) KAI EPEQHKEN AUTOIS NONMA[TA] BOANHRGES, ...,
>(3) KAI ANDREAN KAI FILIPPON KAI ..... KAI IOUDAN ISKARIWQ.
>I expect the paragraph (1)-(3) to be a list of names.
>(3) is a list of names. (2a) is a list of names, and (2b) is
>an explanation about the listed names. Because (2h),
>as a sentence, is added to a list of names, it looks strange.
>But if we think (2b) as a parenthetical remark, it is acceptable.
>However, (1) presents a real problem. It talks about Simon, without
>first presenting his name. If I had
> SIMON KAI EPEQHKEN ONOMA AUTWi PETRON,
>I would not complain, because I can take KAI EPEQHKEN ONOMA AUTWi PETRON
>as a parenthetical remark.
>Is there any way to make sense of the above construction?
Two points need to be considered: (a) this sequence really begins with Mk
3:13 and continues through 3:19; (b) there are critical problems with the
text: you're evidently reading what the editors of the critical text have
bracketed as a legitimate part of the text; thus you're reading (1), (2a),
(2b) and (3) above as if they were intended by the original writer/redactor
to follow upon the bracketed EPOIHSEN TOUS DWDEKA. You ought rather to see
the key verse in Mk 3:14, KAI EPOIHSEN DWDEKA [hOUS KAI APOSTOLOUS
WNOMASEN] hINA WSIN MET' AUTOU KAI hINA APOSTELLHi AUTOUS KHRUSSEIN ...
It's pretty clear that this pericope presents several text-critical
problems that need to be resolved before one starts asking the discourse
questions--or at least one needs to deal with them at the same time.
Moreover, I think it would also behoove one studying this passage in Mark
to consider the parallels in Matthew (5:1 and 10:1-4) and in Luke (6:12-16
and 9:1-2). We don't discuss Source-Critical and Redaction-Critical matters
on B-Greek, but I think that one studying any of these passages needs to
take the formulation of the same (oral?) gospel tradition into these three
variants. It is certainly not unlikely that the MS tradition has been
impacted by comparison of the synoptic gospels with each other and some
effort to harmonize their formulation--and I suspect that's what's involved
in these bracketed segments within the Marcan text. Metzger (_Textual
Commentary on the Greek New Testament_ 2nd edition) has notes on the
bracketed material in Mk 3:14 and 3:16 which I won't reproduce here but
which I think are worth looking at.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
More information about the B-Greek