Kata Markon

[JFAlward AT aol.com]

In a message dated 10/25/02 1:01:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
rmiltonc AT hotmail.com writes:

RALPH COX
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 "You're still asleep!", meaning "asleep on the job!", 
KAI ANAPAUESTHE, "and resting!", APEXE, "Enough!" This all means they all 
failed to avoid entering EIS PERASMON.
 
JOE ALWARD
I could not agree with you more, Ralph.  The context of the entire gospel of 
Mark makes clear that one of Mark's principal messages is that the disciples 
fail Jesus repeatedly, and falling asleep after Jesus had asked them to pray 
to stay awake is just one more example of their failure.

This failure motif cannot have been missed by his audience, to whom Mark's 
message would have been made abundantly clear:  Don't YOU fail Jesus like the 
disciples did.  Your observation, Ralph, is exactly the type of common sense 
argument based on context that I have been trying to convey to the Kata 
Markon forum for a week.  

Irrespective of whether a technical analysis of the esoterica of the Greek 
construction can support a completely different meaning of Mark 14:38, one 
cannot--and should not try to--escape the crystal-clear intent of Mark, the 
one which you have so ably described.  Mark was having Jesus tell his 
disciples to pray that they not fall asleep. 

Few things in Mark are clearer than that teaching, in my view.  Anyone who 
will affirm what I believe is a radical alternative interpretation, based 
largely on what seems to be a debatable translation of a few Greek words, 
while seemingly failing to take context and motif into serious account, will 
face a furious challenge my opinion.   I expect a forest of hands to be 
raised in opposition in the hall following Jeffrey's presentation.


Thanks again for your comments, Ralph.



Regards,
Joe
"Sleeping Disciples," at http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Sleeping_Disciples
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------
Joseph F. Alward, PhD
Assistant Professor
Department of Physics
University of the Pacific 
Stockton CA 95201
email:  JFAlward AT aol.com

Web Page:  "A Skeptical View of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html