Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

gmark - Re: [GMark] Re: The opening lines of Mark

gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Kata Markon

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Michael Turton <turtonm AT yahoo.com>
  • To: Kata Markon <gmark AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [GMark] Re: The opening lines of Mark
  • Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 20:32:24 -0700 (PDT)

> Anti and Post Nicean Fathers all the way up to
> modern criticism
> V. Taylor
> W. Marxen
> S.R. Driver
> A. Plummer
> C.A. Briggs
> L. Hurtado
>
> and the list goes on and on. You see, NO English
> translation that I have ever
> read translates this text as I do.

Just a few thoughts. First, some others have
recognized the possibilities you do. Robertson's
commentary, for example:

"The beginning (arch). There is no article in the
Greek. It is possible that the phrase served as a
heading or title for the paragraph about the ministry
of the Baptist or as the superscription for the whole
Gospel (Bruce) placed either by Mark or a scribe. And
then the Gospel of Jesus Christ means the Message
about Jesus Christ (objective genitive). **The word
Gospel here (euaggelion) comes close to meaning the
record itself as told by Mark.**

(http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/rwp.cgi?book=mr&chapter=001&verse=001&next=002&prev=045)

Second, I wish to echo your assertion that Mark never
errs. I am working on a historical commentary on Mark
and have found myself adopting as a working principle
the idea that many of the classic "errors" of Mark's
are intentional literary devices. In my personal and
liable-to-be-wrong view Homer may nod, but Mark never
sleeps.

Third, I like the way the reference to Isa 40:9 is
followed immediately by a riff on Isa 40 in Mark 1:3,
this time Isaiah 40:3.

Willker's Greek text commentary on Mark (online at
http://www-user.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html)
cites F Spitta back in 1904 who said that the first
two Greek words in v2 are "never the introductory
clause but rather always follows the report of
something seen as fulfillment of the prophetic word."
That might be construed as support for your case.

Against your reconstruction it must be noted that Mark
might originally have had "the prophets" and a later
scribe or redactor changed it to Isaiah. Willker gives
examples on p12 where some manuscripts of Mt 13:35 and
Mt 1:22 have been changed from "through the prophet"
to "Isaiah."

Hope this helps.

Michael

=====
Michael Turton
AFL Dept
Chaoyang University
Taiwan Site
http://users2.ev1.net/~turton/teach_index.html
Sri Lanka site
http://users2.ev1.net/~turton/lanka/lankindex.html



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page