Mark 1:12

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Thu Feb 20 14:35:11 EST 2003

 

[] RE: Why learn Greek? [] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? Having begun to work on a short commentary on Mark’s gospel I’m noticing”obvious” things I’ve never paid any attention to before. As a firstinstance, Mark’s very brief temptation narrative 1:12-13 begins with thesentence (1:12): KAI EUQUS TO PNEUMA AUTON EKBALLEI EIS THN ERHMON. Theexpression seems to me to contrast sharply with Matthew’s TOTE hO IHSOUSANHCQH EIS THN ERHMON hUPO TOU PNEUMATOS Mt 4:1) and Luke’s IHSOUS DEPLHRHS PNEUMATOS hAGIOU hUPESTREYEN APO TOU IORDANOU KAI HGETO EN TWiPNEUMATI EN THi ERHMWi (Lk 4:1).My question is not a source-critical one (I make no assumption of Marcanpriority) here but strictly a question of perspective implied by the choiceof a verb. While Matthew and Luke both use passive forms of AGW or thecompound ANAGW to indicate a spiritual “guidance” Jesus “into” (Mt) or “in”(Lk) the wilderness, Mark’s Spirit seems to “jolt” Jesus suddenly into thewilderness from the Jordan where he has just been baptized. EKBALLW is averb which elsewhere in Mark is used predominantly of exorcism of demons,otherwise of exorcism of Satan (3:23), of expulsion (of everybody in thehouse of the chief of the synagogue, 5:40 and of moneychangers from thetemple, 11:15), of the eye that SKANDALIZEI (9:47), and of the murderedbeloved son of the owner of the vineyard (12:8). EKBALLEI in Mk 1:12 isactive and seems violent; it would appear that Jesus is being representedhere almost as a victim, as the passive object of a violent thrusting thatis external to himself.BDAG offers: “2. to cause to go or remove from a position (without force),send out/away, release, bring out” but under 1 “1. force to leave, driveout, expel ” and says “Mk 1:12 is perh. to be understood in this sense, cp.Gen 3:24” The comparison of the expulsion of Adam & Eve from the garden isinteresting, but there is evidently no clear consensus on the usage of thisverb here.Although I’ve never read this narrative snippet before without a naggingcuriosity (one tends to think how insignificant Mark’s version is incomparison with those of Matthew and Luke and therefore doesn’t ask thequestion: why does MARK describe the temptation this way, and what did HEunderstand it to mean?), I’ve never raised the question directly before andI don’t recall seeing it discussed by any commentator. I would welcome anythoughts or Hinweise to relevant literature.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at mcsinternet.netWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

 

[] RE: Why learn Greek?[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? Barry Hofstetter nebarry at earthlink.net
Thu Feb 20 14:44:42 EST 2003

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? [] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? —– Original Message —–From: “Carl W. Conrad” <cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu>To: “‘Biblical Greek'” < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 2:35 PMSubject: [] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?> Although I’ve never read this narrative snippet before without a nagging> curiosity (one tends to think how insignificant Mark’s version is in> comparison with those of Matthew and Luke and therefore doesn’t ask the> question: why does MARK describe the temptation this way, and what did HE> understand it to mean?), I’ve never raised the question directly before and> I don’t recall seeing it discussed by any commentator. I would welcome any> thoughts or Hinweise to relevant literature.Both Swete and Cranfield suggest that the word means word refers to “strongimpulse,” and Swete supplies some citations from other authors that thereference is not so much a violent expulsion in this context as simply anemphasis on the activity of the Spirit in moving Jesus. Exegetically, I recallthat Mark has a strong preference for active vs. passive verbs. In the firstchapter, the narrative flow is intended to be rapid, and active verbs combinedwith markers such as EUQUS tend to highlight that movement. The choice wouldthen be for the stylistic purpose to support the narrative emphasis.N.E. Barry HofstetterProfessor of Theological and Biblical Studies The Center for Urban Theological Studies, Philadelphia, PAhttp://home.earthlink.net/~nebarry

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? Jim West jwest at highland.net
Thu Feb 20 14:52:30 EST 2003

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? [] Series on Pauline Theology At 02:35 PM 2/20/03 -0500, you wrote:>I don’t recall seeing it discussed by any commentator. I would welcome any>thoughts or Hinweise to relevant literature.see D. Hill, “Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings”.Pesch says “Die apokalyptische Sprach- und Vorstellungswelt dauert an: derGeist ist kaum als zwingende, eher als fuehrende (vgl Lk par) Gotteskraftgedacht: Jesu messianische Ausruestung mit dem Geist dient ja gerade derBesiegung Satans”. (Rudolf Pesch- Das Markusevangelium). jim+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Jim West, ThDBiblical Studies Resourceshttp://web.infoave.net/~jwest

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?[] Series on Pauline Theology

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Feb 21 02:13:12 EST 2003

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? [] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? [Carl:]> Having begun to work on a short commentary on Mark’s gospel I’m noticing> “obvious” things I’ve never paid any attention to before. As a first> instance, Mark’s very brief temptation narrative 1:12-13 begins with the> sentence (1:12): KAI EUQUS TO PNEUMA AUTON EKBALLEI EIS THN ERHMON. The> expression seems to me to contrast sharply with Matthew’s TOTE hO IHSOUS> ANHCQH EIS THN ERHMON hUPO TOU PNEUMATOS Mt 4:1) and Luke’s IHSOUS DE> PLHRHS PNEUMATOS hAGIOU hUPESTREYEN APO TOU IORDANOU KAI HGETO EN TWi> PNEUMATI EN THi ERHMWi (Lk 4:1).> > My question is not a source-critical one (I make no assumption of Marcan> priority) here but strictly a question of perspective implied by> the choice> of a verb. While Matthew and Luke both use passive forms of AGW or the> compound ANAGW to indicate a spiritual “guidance” Jesus “into”> (Mt) or “in”> (Lk) the wilderness, Mark’s Spirit seems to “jolt” Jesus suddenly into the> wilderness from the Jordan where he has just been baptized. EKBALLW is a> verb which elsewhere in Mark is used predominantly of exorcism of demons,> otherwise of exorcism of Satan (3:23), of expulsion (of everybody in the> house of the chief of the synagogue, 5:40 and of moneychangers from the> temple, 11:15), of the eye that SKANDALIZEI (9:47), and of the murdered> beloved son of the owner of the vineyard (12:8). EKBALLEI in Mk 1:12 is> active and seems violent; it would appear that Jesus is being represented> here almost as a victim, as the passive object of a violent thrusting that> is external to himself.No, not violent, but he is depicted as being under an authoritative command,not passive, but obedient.> BDAG offers: “2. to cause to go or remove from a position (without force),> send out/away, release, bring out” but under 1 “1. force to leave, drive> out, expel ” and says “Mk 1:12 is perh. to be understood in this> sense, cp.> Gen 3:24″ The comparison of the expulsion of Adam & Eve from the garden is> interesting, but there is evidently no clear consensus on the> usage of this verb here.The comparison to Gen 3:24 is misleading. I do not have BDAG, but at thispoint the older BAGD appears to be “softer” than the newer version.BAGD offers: “2. without the connotation of force: send out (PRyl. 80, 1 [Iad], 1 Macc 12:27) workers Mt 9:38; Lk 10:2 (cf. PMich. 618, 15f [II ad]);send away Js 2:25; release Ac 16:37; lead out (…Theophanes, Chron. 388, 28de Boor) Mk 1:12 (but see 1 above); bring out of sheep J 10:4 (cf. Hs 6, 2,6; Longus 3, 33, 2 …)”Instead of Gen 3:24 which is irrelevant, there are clear and relevantparallels to the use of EKBALLEIN in Exodus. The trial period of 40 daysJesus had to spend in the wilderness are parallel in many ways to the trialperiod of 40 years the Israelites had to spend in the wilderness. Both werefaced with lack of food and water and the question about what to do then.Trust in God in a difficult setting, give in to various temptations or giveup and return to “Egypt”.The following uses of EKBALLW in Exodus I find instructive, and it may bethat Mark intended a reference to them.Exod 6:1 (NRSV): Then the LORD said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I willdo to Pharaoh: Indeed, by a mighty hand he will let them go (LXX:EXAPOSTELEI); by a mighty hand he will drive them out of his land.” (LXX:KAI EN BRACIONI hUYHLWi *EKBALEI* AUTOUS)Exod 11:1: The LORD said to Moses, “I will bring one more plague uponPharaoh and upon Egypt; afterwards he will let you go from here; indeed,when he lets you go, he will drive you away.LXX: KAI META TAUTA EXAPOSTELEI hUMAS ENTEUQEN, hOTAN DE EXAPOSTELLHi hUMASSUN PANTI, *EKBALEI* hUMAS EKBOLHi.Exod 12:33: The Egyptians urged the people to hasten their departure fromthe land.LXX: KAI KATEBIAZONTO hOI AIGUPTIOI TON LAON SPOUDHi *EKBALEIN* AUTOUS ENTHS GHSExod 12:39: They baked unleavened cakes of the dough that they had broughtout of Egypt; it was not leavened, because they were driven out of Egypt andcould not wait, nor had they prepared any provisions for themselves.LXX: *EXEBALON* GAR AUTOUS hOI AIGUPTIOIThese references say that it was in a sense God who drove the Israelites outof Egypt, although he used Pharaoh as his instrument. It is likely that someof the people did not want to go into an uncertain future.I can imagine that there would be one (human) part of Jesus which did notwant to go into the wilderness to be tried and tested by the Devil, butanother (divine) part which knew that this was what he had to do.When Matthew and Luke says that the Spirit led Jesus out, I still think thatimplies an order or a command, not just a suggestion. Mark depicts moreclearly that this is indeed a command from God through the Holy Spirit. Idon’t see a sharp contrast between Mark’s “driving” and the “leading” of theothers. In fact, they complement one another nicely to show that there was acommand behind the “leading”.Iver Larsen

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Feb 21 08:50:44 EST 2003

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? [] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? My thanks to Iver, Jim, Barry as well as to the others who contacted meoff-list with thought, suggestions and pointers to relevant comments madeby others. I’m not going to engage in any Auseinandersetzung on this forumabout the interpretation of the text, as much of that involves going farbeyond the explicit indications in the almost “skeletal” Marcan Greeknarrative. Just some notes here and there on Iver’s research report below.At 10:13 AM +0300 2/21/03, Iver Larsen wrote:>[Carl:]>> Having begun to work on a short commentary on Mark’s gospel I’m noticing>> “obvious” things I’ve never paid any attention to before. As a first>> instance, Mark’s very brief temptation narrative 1:12-13 begins with the>> sentence (1:12): KAI EUQUS TO PNEUMA AUTON EKBALLEI EIS THN ERHMON. The>> expression seems to me to contrast sharply with Matthew’s TOTE hO IHSOUS>> ANHCQH EIS THN ERHMON hUPO TOU PNEUMATOS Mt 4:1) and Luke’s IHSOUS DE>> PLHRHS PNEUMATOS hAGIOU hUPESTREYEN APO TOU IORDANOU KAI HGETO EN TWi>> PNEUMATI EN THi ERHMWi (Lk 4:1).>> >> My question is not a source-critical one (I make no assumption of Marcan>> priority) here but strictly a question of perspective implied by>> the choice>> of a verb. While Matthew and Luke both use passive forms of AGW or the>> compound ANAGW to indicate a spiritual “guidance” Jesus “into”>> (Mt) or “in”>> (Lk) the wilderness, Mark’s Spirit seems to “jolt” Jesus suddenly into the>> wilderness from the Jordan where he has just been baptized. EKBALLW is a>> verb which elsewhere in Mark is used predominantly of exorcism of demons,>> otherwise of exorcism of Satan (3:23), of expulsion (of everybody in the>> house of the chief of the synagogue, 5:40 and of moneychangers from the>> temple, 11:15), of the eye that SKANDALIZEI (9:47), and of the murdered>> beloved son of the owner of the vineyard (12:8). EKBALLEI in Mk 1:12 is>> active and seems violent; it would appear that Jesus is being represented>> here almost as a victim, as the passive object of a violent thrusting that>> is external to himself.> >No, not violent, but he is depicted as being under an authoritative command,>not passive, but obedient.Undoubtedly opinions will differ on this, but I can see no suggestion thatJesus participates in the process of his “shunting off” into the desert. Heis removed powerfully, whether one wants to call this the unthinkingobedience of the good soldier or, what seems to me more appropriate, theconveyance by a PNEUMA which is as much a WIND as a divine emanation; Ithink more of the mysterious movements of Elijah who pops up now here, nowthere “as the spirit moves him.” And it would certainly appear that Elijahis not far from Mark’s mind inasmuch as he evidently envisions John theBaptist as Elijah redivivus.>> BDAG offers: “2. to cause to go or remove from a position (without force),>> send out/away, release, bring out” but under 1 “1. force to leave, drive>> out, expel ” and says “Mk 1:12 is perh. to be understood in this>> sense, cp.>> Gen 3:24″ The comparison of the expulsion of Adam & Eve from the garden is>> interesting, but there is evidently no clear consensus on the>> usage of this verb here.> >The comparison to Gen 3:24 is misleading. I do not have BDAG, but at this>point the older BAGD appears to be “softer” than the newer version.>BAGD offers: “2. without the connotation of force: send out (PRyl. 80, 1 [I>ad], 1 Macc 12:27) workers Mt 9:38; Lk 10:2 (cf. PMich. 618, 15f [II ad]);>send away Js 2:25; release Ac 16:37; lead out (…Theophanes, Chron. 388, 28>de Boor) Mk 1:12 (but see 1 above); bring out of sheep J 10:4 (cf. Hs 6, 2,>6; Longus 3, 33, 2 …)”> >Instead of Gen 3:24 which is irrelevant, there are clear and relevant>parallels to the use of EKBALLEIN in Exodus. The trial period of 40 days>Jesus had to spend in the wilderness are parallel in many ways to the trial>period of 40 years the Israelites had to spend in the wilderness. Both were>faced with lack of food and water and the question about what to do then.>Trust in God in a difficult setting, give in to various temptations or give>up and return to “Egypt”.For my part, I don’t think that Danker was taking the allusion to Genesis3:24 very seriously, but was reporting this as one perspective on theusage; it’s certainly not one that I share. And I readily agree that theallusions to Exodus are both clear and relevant. I appreciate Iver’smarshaling of them and his comments. Finally, although I don’t want to getinto questions and discussions that transcend the proper focus of ,I have to say that I think Mark’s focus and perspective in his telling ofthe story of Jesus in the wilderness, for all that it does share featureswith the telling by Matthew and Luke, is unique and that Mark’s selectionof EKBALLEI, however we are to understand it, is quite deliberate.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? waldo slusher waldoslusher at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 21 10:50:27 EST 2003

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? [] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? Here is basically how I see authorial approaches toany commentary of Mark, or other gospels for thatmatter;1. Speculate as to whether or not Mark wrote hisgospel first, second, etc…2. Try to sort out the hypothetical Q source3. Speculate as to what OT passages are driving Markto say what he does4. Guess how many later redactors changed Mark fromwhat he originally said5. Speculate that Mark wrote first the gospel inAramaic and then he or some other redactor rewroteMark, with several errors, changes, inaccuracies6. Speculate as to how many different documents Markwas using, could he have had some authentic documents,could he have had inauthentic documents, speculate asto which sources he used for a particular pericope7. On and on we go….And worst of all, interpret Mark based on theaccumulated subjective results of all the abovespeculations. And then color your entire commentarybased, not on what has been preserved for us in theexisting manuscripts, but on one’s hunches andbrilliant insights into what most mortal men couldnever have figured out.I would like to see, therefore, a commentary on simplywhat we have in front of us today. What does the textsay. Then, and only then, fill the commentary withfootnotes that reflect the results of all speculativeinquiry and conclusions. I speak only for myself, butI am not terribly interested in the author’s guessesand reconstructions of what must have been the casedespite contrary historical and manuscript evidences.Finally, if one is a Greek scholar, then list for usmortals not ONLY what you believe the text (whatevertext you use or invent) says, but what are viableoptions, primarily in regard to grammatical choices.I think Moo was trying to do some of this in hiscommentary on Romans. He actually gives alternategrammatical options and theological positions. Then hegives his view.=====Waldo SlusherCalgary, AB__________________________________________________Do you Yahoo!?Yahoo! Tax Center – forms, calculators, tips, morehttp://taxes.yahoo.com/

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Fri Feb 21 11:12:51 EST 2003

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? [] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? > Undoubtedly opinions will differ on this, but I can see no suggestion that> Jesus participates in the process of his “shunting off” into the> desert. He> is removed powerfully, whether one wants to call this the unthinking> obedience of the good soldier or, what seems to me more appropriate, the> conveyance by a PNEUMA which is as much a WIND as a divine emanation;Are you suggesting that a strong wind blew him out in the desert? :-)I am happy to accept the “obedience” part of it, but not the “unthinking”.> I have to say that I think Mark’s focus and perspective in his telling of> the story of Jesus in the wilderness, for all that it does share features> with the telling by Matthew and Luke, is unique and that Mark’s selection> of EKBALLEI, however we are to understand it, is quite deliberate.Yes, I am quite sure it was deliberate. But it is certainly within thesemantic range of EKBALLW to indicate a command to go. This was listed inBAGD among other places in:Luke 10:2 hOPWS ERGATAS EKBALHi EIS TON QERISMON AUTOU “that he may sendworkers out into his harvesting.”There are many cases where EKBALLW does not refer to removal by physicalforce, but an authoritative command. This applies to “casting out” demons,too. Here it is not a physical or forceful removal, but a command to leave.In John 10:3-4 it appears that EXAGW and EKBALLW are used as synonyms forthe same event:KAI TA IDIA PROBATA FWNEI KAT’ ONOMA KAI EXAGEI AUTA. hOTAN TA IDIA PANTAEKBALHi, EMPROSQEN AUTWN POREUETAI, KAI TA PROBATA AUTWi AKOLOUQEI.So, I don’t see a problem in Mark 1:12 saying that Jesus received anauthoritative directive from the Holy Spirit to go out in the wilderness,and he did so. In English, we can express this by “send” as NIV and CEV door “made him go” as GNB has or “compelled him to go” as NLT has or “drivehim out” as RSV and REB have.I would prefer “send”, because “drive” or “compel” imply a reluctance orresistance which is not implied in the context. All English translations use”send” in Luke 10:4, so why not here?Iver Larsen

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Feb 21 11:11:06 EST 2003

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? [] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)? I earnestly hope that Waldo’s message will NOT start a thread on what acommentary should be; if it does, I shall probably have to halt it becausethis is all outside the legitimate scope of discussion. I mentionedthat I was starting work on a commentary on Mark, but I asked a specificquestion about a specific Greek word in a specific passage, and I neverintended to launch into any discussion of source critical theories, nor didI, in mentioning the Lucan and Matthaean differences from Mark with regardto Mark’s EKBALLEI, suggest any reason for the differences; I did, in mylast message on the thread, say something that I think is consistent withmost of what you’re saying here, that Mark’s gospel text needs to be lookedat for its own sake; if I implied anything by that, it was that whether ornot we view the Matthaean and Lucan versions as texts that Mark shortenedand altered or as texts that are expansions and corrections of what Markwrote, the Marcan text ought to be viewed in its own right as telling thestory in Mark’s own way; where the Matthaean and Lucanare useful for one doing this is to show ALTERNATIVE modes of telling thestory; that makes clearer what is distinctive about Mark’s story. But Ineither suggested any perspective on the Synoptic question nor do I thinkthat discussion of that or of what a good commentary OUGHT to be isappropriate to this list.– Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243cwconrad at artsci.wustl.eduWWW: http://www.mcsinternet.net/~cwconrad/

 

[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?[] EKBALLEI: simple word in strange context (Mk 1:12)?

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]