Kata Markon

["Ralph Cox" <rmiltonc AT hotmail.com>]

Giving EIS PERASMON

A minor note on this discussion of EIS PERASMON:

The account of the failing disciples in the garden is part of the larger motif of their failing to grasp the whole moment; failing to understand his warning, failing to keep watch, failing to defend him, failing to stay with him, and Peter even failing to avoid denying Jesus three times.

It is very clear that, after Jesus has told them to stand watch, his telling them to "not enter into temptation" means to "not fail in standing watch" and to "not give in to the temptation to sleep."

When Jesus returns and says KATEUDETE TO LOIPON, (literally "asleep [at] this moment"), he is saying "Your still asleep!", meaning "asleep on the job!", KAI ANAPAUESTHE, "and resting!", APEXE, "Enough!" This all means they all failed to avoid entering EIS PERASMON.

Ralph Cox rmiltonc AT hotmail.com 10-24-02

>From: "Eric Eve"

>Reply-To: "Kata Markon"

>To: "Kata Markon"

>Subject: [gmark] Re: Critique of Gibson's Conference Paper

>Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 17:49:54 +0100

>

>Joe Alward wrote:

>

> > Too much emphasis I think has been paid to the esoterica of Greek grammar,

> > and this has allowed some members, in my opinion, to pay less attention to

> > context and obvious surface meaning than I believe they deserve.

>

> > I do not think we should imagine that the translation committees of dozens

>of

> > different Bible versions were all wrong about the context. They all made

>it

> > clear that they believed that Jesus was asking the disciples to pray for

>the

> > strength to stay awake until Jesus returned from his prayer, and I have a

> > hunch that most members of this forum have a strong inkling that they were

> > correct, no matter whether it is possible to see in the syntax and grammar

> > alone the completely different meaning Gibson is proposing.

>

> > I think that if one doesn't let grammatical construction (using Sid's

>words

> > here) be a tail wagging a dog, and instead lets common sense and context

> > rule, then just on the basis alone of the outline I have presented above,

>I

> > think we have no choice but to choose the first one, never mind all of the

> > other reasons I mentioned elsewhere.

>

>This argument is very odd. I should have thought that many people on this

>list would imagine that paying attention to Greek grammar and the semantic

>range of Greek words were fundamental prerequisites to determining what the

>"obvious surface meaning" of a Greek text actually is. Jeffrey's argument is

>that Mark's audience could not have heard MH ELQHTE EIS PEIRASMON as "lest

>you be tempted/tested", and there must be limits to the extent that context

>can determine meaning. If you cannot meet Jeffrey's arguments at this level,

>you haven't got a case - you simply make yourself sound like someone who

>repeatedly urges that Einstein must be wrong because common sense shows we

>live in Newtonian universe and then refuses to engage in any argument that

>involves mathematics on the grounds that the mathematical dog is wagging the

>tail of common sense observation.

>

> > The story goes like this:

>

> > 1. Jesus says, do not fall asleep

>

> > 2. Jesus goes away.

>

> > 3. Jesus returns and finds them asleep.

>

> > 4 Jesus tells them to pray that God give them the strength

>

> > a. not to fall asleep, again

> > b. not to test God.

>

>

>You have previously urged a connexion between this scene and Mark 13.32-37.

>Mark 13 is surely not concerned with literal, physical sleep, as if Jesus

>were commanding his followers to suffer permanent sleep deprivation until

>his return. This might be a clue that 'sleep' and 'watchfulness' have

>metaphorical connotations which could be carried over into this passage.

>Instead of taking GRHGOREITE to mean "don't fall asleep" at Mk 14.34, one

>might translate it "Watch out!" (for what is unspecified at this point). The

>disciples' sleepiness then shows their failure to watch out, but it isn't

>the main point. What you don't explain is why, in this context, Jesus should

>be so concerned about purely physical sleep (since having the disciples stay

>awake when they're tired serves no obvious purpose in the story).

>

>Nowhere does Mark 14.38 mention praying for strength, so your alternatives

>4. a and b are already a misrepesentation. To render MH ELQHTE EIS PEIRASMON

>as 'for strength not to fall asleep, again' is surely highly questionable -

>one might even see it as an attempt to foist a meaning onto the text. Your

>reasoning, as I understand it, is that (despite Jeffrey's evidence to the

>contrary), 'enter into testing' means 'be tested' and that the test in

>question is that of staying awake when one wishes to fall asleep. But, quite

>apart from any other problems with this reading, at the point in Mark's

>story that Jesus utters these words, the disciples have already failed this

>test (assuming for the sake of argument that the text sees it as a test). A

>fortiori, they must already be subject to this test. To pray not to be

>subjected to this test would then be plain daft (amongst other things it

>would be a prayer to change the past). So despite what you assert, it seems

>to me that common sense and context fail to support your reading of the

>text.

>

>Best wishes,

>

>Eric

>----------------------------------

>Eric Eve

>Harris Manchester College, Oxford

>

>

>

>

>---

>You are currently subscribed to gmark as: rmiltonc AT hotmail.com

>To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst('Email.Unsub')

---

Protect your PC - Click here for McAfee.com VirusScan Online