Mark 6:49

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Mark Lightman lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 19 15:23:58 EDT 2010

[] Walking on Water [] Walking on Water Richard wrote: <My friend is a pretty bright fellow normally and yet he insists that heknows of a reputable source of Greek scholarship that upholds this notion ofJesus “walking by the sea” in Mark’s gospel. So now let me ask this… Doesanyone know of anywhere in Greek literature where “PERIPATWN EPI THTHALASSH” is used in this way or could be legitimately translated in thisway or where he may have gotten this idea otherwise?> Hi, Richard, Maybe we do and maybe we don’t, but that is beside the point.EPI has such a wide semantic range that I would notbe surprised if it DOES mean this somewhere. Ex 14:2 hasστρατοπεδευσεις επι της θαλασσης  STRATOPEDEUSEISEPI THS QALASSHS “and you shall make your camp by thesea.” EPI plus the gen here certainly does not mean “upon.”But this has nothing, or almost nothing, to do with your friend’stheory.  KATAFILEW (“I kiss”) often in Homer means “I entertain,””I give a stranger a meal and a hot bath,” but the chance that itmeans this in Mark 14:45 (“and Judas kissed Him”) is, on a scaleof 1 to 2, 1 being impossible and 2 being certain, a little less thanzero.  It cannot mean this, not because the word KATAFILEWcannot mean this, but because the text would make no senseread this way.  This was, I think, Andrew’s point.  If something makesno sense in English it cannot make any sense in Greek.  It is possiblethat something that means XYZ in English can mean XYZ.1 in Greek, but if something means “he works wonders” in English,it cannot mean “chicken salad” in Greek.  Not that youwould necessary know this from reading the posts on.  A JOKE A JOKE THAT WAS A JOKE. I don’t mean to pick on you or your friend.  He sounds like a nice guy.  You should keep lots of friends who see things differently than you do it.  But what bothers me about thisis that it  reflects  what I call “the History ChannelView of History.”  This is the idea that a bizarre, alternativehistory can be drawn up if we just go back to “the originalGreek sources” or “the authentic early manuscripts” or”the genuine clay tablets.”  Many people even in the Churchseem to think that the New Testament says something fundamentally different in Greek than it does in English,that all they have is a “translation of a translation.”Maybe this is not where your friend is coming from, butI too would like to know where he gets this.  Maybe theargument is more subtle, than in some “early form”of the GNT the text meant this and all we have isa translation of a translation and next up on A & E,was Jesus really an Insurance Salesman?–new light from”the Original Ancient Early Sources.”  People who know Greek, should, if nothing else,tell people why walking on water means walking onwater and why this has nothing to do with Greek. But it is a good question, and I’m glad you brought itup. And that book something mentioned,“The Word” by Irving Wallace, is a good read.  No joke. Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS— On Thu, 3/4/10, Richard Lindeman <oblchurch at msn.com> wrote:From: Richard Lindeman <oblchurch at msn.com>Subject: Re: [] Walking on WaterTo: at lists.ibiblio.orgDate: Thursday, March 4, 2010, 3:32 PMMark & George:Thanks for your comments.  This is helpful as it represents my ownviewpoint. However, as much as I disagree with my friend, I¹m not sure thatI would give thisentirely a zero. Perhaps a 0.1   – after all, it is usage that determineslanguage and not the other way around isn¹t it?Suppose for example, that in the midst of writing his gospel St. Mark wasstruck by a rock and dazed for only a moment. And in that moment he suddenlywaxed poetic, recalling an old Greek poem entitled ³PERIPATWN EPI THTHALASSH² in which the poet uses this phrase to express the thought of³Walking by the sea².My friend is a pretty bright fellow normally and yet he insists that heknows of a reputable source of Greek scholarship that upholds this notion ofJesus ³walking by the sea² in Mark¹s gospel. So now let me ask this… Doesanyone know of anywhere in Greek literature where ³PERIPATWN EPI THTHALASSH² is used in this way or could be legitimately translated in thisway or where he may have gotten this idea otherwise?Thanks!Rich LindemanOn 3/4/10 1:43 PM, “Mark Lightman” <lightmanmark at yahoo.com> wrote:> I have a slightly different take on this than George does.> On a scale of 1 to 1000, 1 being not even theoretically possible> under any imagined scenario, and 1000 being metaphysical> certitude, I would give this a zero.> > Mark L> — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] Walking on Water[] Walking on Water

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) theomann at comcast.net theomann at comcast.net
Fri Mar 19 15:56:16 EDT 2010

[] TOU AUTOU in Cramer’s Catena Acta [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Richard wrote:   <My friend is a pretty bright fellow normally and yet he insists that he knows of a reputable source of Greek scholarship that upholds this notion of Jesus “walking by the sea” in Mark’s gospel. So now let me ask this… Does anyone know of anywhere in Greek literature where “PERIPATWN EPI TH THALASSH” is used in this way or could be legitimately translated in this way or where he may have gotten this idea otherwise?> _____________________________      I don’t know if I’m on the same page as you, but is the question whether or not Jesus walked on water?  If so, doesn’t the context pretty much dictate that He did?  Verse 47 says that the disciples were in a boat in the middle of the sea (lake), verse 48 says that Jesus went out to them and verse 51 says that He climbed into the boat with them.  That Jesus walked on the water in order to reach them seems to be the natural conclusion.      Sorry if I’ve misunderstood something. Ted Theodore H. Mann theomann at comcast.net

[] TOU AUTOU in Cramer’s Catena Acta[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Mark Lightman lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 19 16:12:24 EDT 2010

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) No, Ted, you have not misunderstood anything.  Youmade my point a lot better and more briefly than I did. In this case the obvious needs to be said (and re-said) because Richard’s friend is not the only guy to say this about “by” not “on” the water.I remember hearing it years ago with just suchan emphasis on what the “Greek really says.” It does sound, though, Ted, that you have slightlydifferent take on this than George and I do.  Withoutputting words in your mouth, are you saying that thechance that EPI THS QALASSHS in Mk 6:49 means”by the water” is, on a scale of zero to zero,zero being impossible and zero being impossible,a zero?       :)Mark LFWSFOROS MARKOS— On Fri, 3/19/10, theomann at comcast.net <theomann at comcast.net> wrote:From: theomann at comcast.net <theomann at comcast.net>Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)To: “bGreek” < at lists.ibiblio.org>Date: Friday, March 19, 2010, 1:56 PMSubject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Richard wrote:   <My friend is a pretty bright fellow normally and yet he insists that he knows of a reputable source of Greek scholarship that upholds this notion of Jesus “walking by the sea” in Mark’s gospel. So now let me ask this… Does anyone know of anywhere in Greek literature where “PERIPATWN EPI TH THALASSH” is used in this way or could be legitimately translated in this way or where he may have gotten this idea otherwise?> _____________________________      I don’t know if I’m on the same page as you, but is the question whether or not Jesus walked on water?  If so, doesn’t the context pretty much dictate that He did?  Verse 47 says that the disciples were in a boat in the middle of the sea (lake), verse 48 says that Jesus went out to them and verse 51 says that He climbed into the boat with them.  That Jesus walked on the water in order to reach them seems to be the natural conclusion.      Sorry if I’ve misunderstood something. Ted Theodore H. Mann theomann at comcast.net   — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 19 16:13:25 EDT 2010

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) No, I don’t think you missed a thing.  Assuming, for the sake of discussion, that he was supposedly walking “by the sea”, why would this have caused the disciples to think that he was an “apparition” or “ghost”?  “Walking by the sea” certainly gives no reason for surprise. georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus_________ ________________________________From: “theomann at comcast.net” <theomann at comcast.net>To: bGreek < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 12:56:16 PMSubject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Richard wrote:   <My friend is a pretty bright fellow normally and yet he insists that he knows of a reputable source of Greek scholarship that upholds this notion of Jesus “walking by the sea” in Mark’s gospel. So now let me ask this… Does anyone know of anywhere in Greek literature where “PERIPATWN EPI TH THALASSH” is used in this way or could be legitimately translated in this way or where he may have gotten this idea otherwise?> _____________________________      I don’t know if I’m on the same page as you, but is the question whether or not Jesus walked on water?  If so, doesn’t the context pretty much dictate that He did?  Verse 47 says that the disciples were in a boat in the middle of the sea (lake), verse 48 says that Jesus went out to them and verse 51 says that He climbed into the boat with them.  That Jesus walked on the water in order to reach them seems to be the natural conclusion.      Sorry if I’ve misunderstood something. Ted Theodore H. Mann theomann at comcast.net   — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Yancy Smith yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Fri Mar 19 17:09:30 EDT 2010

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Mediterranean peoples seem to have known that ghosts couldn’t walk on water, they sink in water. But gods could walk on water. So, when the disciples say Jesus is a ghost, the audience would see to what great extent they were going to avoid the obvious conclusion that Jesus is divine. This point was masterfully brought out in a recent article by Jason Robert Combs, “A Ghost on the Water? Understanding an Absurdity in Mark 6:49-50” JBL 127.2 (2008): 345-58. So, the exclamation by the disciples would have been a further humorous demonstration of obtuseness. They just couldn’t get the point about who Jesus really was and were willing to accept the most preposterous conclusions to avoid the obvious.Yancy SmithYancy W. Smith, PhDWorld Bible Translation Center4028 Daley Ave., Suite 201Fort Worth, TX 76180p 817-595-1664f 817580-7013yancy at wbtc.orgBe kinder than necessary for everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of George F SomselSent: Friday, March 19, 2010 3:13 PMTo: theomann at comcast.net; bGreekSubject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)No, I don’t think you missed a thing. Assuming, for the sake of discussion, that he was supposedly walking “by the sea”, why would this have caused the disciples to think that he was an “apparition” or “ghost”? “Walking by the sea” certainly gives no reason for surprise. georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus_________ ________________________________From: “theomann at comcast.net” <theomann at comcast.net>To: bGreek < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 12:56:16 PMSubject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Richard wrote: <My friend is a pretty bright fellow normally and yet he insists that he knows of a reputable source of Greek scholarship that upholds this notion of Jesus “walking by the sea” in Mark’s gospel. So now let me ask this… Does anyone know of anywhere in Greek literature where “PERIPATWN EPI TH THALASSH” is used in this way or could be legitimately translated in this way or where he may have gotten this idea otherwise?> _____________________________ I don’t know if I’m on the same page as you, but is the question whether or not Jesus walked on water? If so, doesn’t the context pretty much dictate that He did? Verse 47 says that the disciples were in a boat in the middle of the sea (lake), verse 48 says that Jesus went out to them and verse 51 says that He climbed into the boat with them. That Jesus walked on the water in order to reach them seems to be the natural conclusion. Sorry if I’ve misunderstood something. Ted Theodore H. Mann theomann at comcast.net — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) theomann at comcast.net theomann at comcast.net
Fri Mar 19 18:10:11 EDT 2010

[] Thread closed: Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) [] hAGIWSYNH and hAGIOTHTOS —– Original Message —– From: “Mark Lightman” <lightmanmark at yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Without putting words in your mouth, are you saying that the chance that EPI THS QALASSHS in Mk 6:49 means “by the water” is, on a scale of zero to zero, zero being impossible and zero being impossible, a zero?       🙂 ____________________________________ I would guess that the possibility of EPI meaning “by,” in this instance, falls at about the midpoint of the statistical range you suggest. Ted Theodore H. Mann theomann at comcast.net

[] Thread closed: Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)[] hAGIWSYNH and hAGIOTHTOS

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) George F Somsel gfsomsel at yahoo.com
Sat Mar 20 01:12:26 EDT 2010

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) It took me a while to locate that particular volume so I could read the article.  It seems that the argumentation is rather deficient.  While he notes that in certain cases ghosts were thought to be limited by water, it doesn’t seem to establish that it was thus in all cases.  Ghosts appear to be conceived as being limited much as humans are by oceans and streams.  While water in one citation appears to be able in one case to kill a ghost (sic !) in the play by Apuleus, burial at sea seems to be overcome by the same method as would be the case if the departed had been buried on land but on the other side of water, namely, by calling the dead three times which would indicate that water would not therefore be deemed fatal to the shade.  The point of the article seems to be that Jesus is depicted as divine, which may well be the case; but that Mark is constructing a farce on the order of Apuleus is by no means evident.  Whether the disciples were to be considered to be credulous is not particularly dependent upon whether the ancients thought water was particularly inimicable to ghosts.  I’m not at all accepting of a rule that the ancients considered water to be a kind of garlic or a cross to vampires (for anyone credulous enough to accept their existence).  As to whether the word φάντασμα FANTASMA by itself could signify a god is similarly not established since it would appear that when φάντασμα FANTASMA is used to signify some divine being it does not appear by itself but in combination with δαίμονος DAIMONOS so that φάντασμα FANTASMA would seem to signify an apparition which may or may not be divine depending upon whether it is otherwise qualified.   georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus_________ ________________________________From: Yancy Smith <yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net>To: bGreek < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 2:09:30 PMSubject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)Mediterranean peoples seem to have known that ghosts couldn’t walk on water, they sink in water. But gods could walk on water. So, when the disciples say Jesus is a ghost, the audience would see to what great extent they were going to avoid the obvious conclusion that Jesus is divine. This point was masterfully brought out in a recent article by Jason Robert Combs, “A Ghost on the Water? Understanding an Absurdity in Mark 6:49-50” JBL 127.2 (2008): 345-58. So, the exclamation by the disciples would have been a further humorous demonstration of obtuseness. They just couldn’t get the point about who Jesus really was and were willing to accept the most preposterous conclusions to avoid the obvious.Yancy SmithYancy W. Smith, PhDWorld Bible Translation Center4028 Daley Ave., Suite 201Fort Worth, TX 76180p 817-595-1664f 817580-7013yancy at wbtc.orgBe kinder than necessary for everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.—–Original Message—–From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of George F SomselSent: Friday, March 19, 2010 3:13 PMTo: theomann at comcast.net; bGreekSubject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)No, I don’t think you missed a thing.  Assuming, for the sake of discussion, that he was supposedly walking “by the sea”, why would this have caused the disciples to think that he was an “apparition” or “ghost”?  “Walking by the sea” certainly gives no reason for surprise.georgegfsomsel … search for truth, hear truth, learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, defend the truth till death.- Jan Hus_________ ________________________________From: “theomann at comcast.net” <theomann at comcast.net>To: bGreek < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 12:56:16 PMSubject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Richard wrote:   <My friend is a pretty bright fellow normally and yet he insists that he knows of a reputable source of Greek scholarship that upholds this notion of Jesus “walking by the sea” in Mark’s gospel. So now let me ask this… Does anyone know of anywhere in Greek literature where “PERIPATWN EPI TH THALASSH” is used in this way or could be legitimately translated in this way or where he may have gotten this idea otherwise?> _____________________________     I don’t know if I’m on the same page as you, but is the question whether or not Jesus walked on water?  If so, doesn’t the context pretty much dictate that He did?  Verse 47 says that the disciples were in a boat in the middle of the sea (lake), verse 48 says that Jesus went out to them and verse 51 says that He climbed into the boat with them.  That Jesus walked on the water in order to reach them seems to be the natural conclusion.     Sorry if I’ve misunderstood something. Ted Theodore H. Mann theomann at comcast.net  — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/      — home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net
Sat Mar 20 03:32:46 EDT 2010

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) [] Thread closed: Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) George,OK, I’m pretty sure Carl is going to pounce on me any moment because ghosts and demons might seem to be way of topic for the list. The question was originally about whether “walking on the lake” should be “walking beside the lake.” The answer to that has been pretty definite: walking on the water. That raises, of course, another issue, the disciples thought they saw a FANTASMA walking on the water. I guess I am asking whether that is expected behavior for a FANTASMA or not. It seems that ending up in the sea seems to be a sort of punctuation point for the end of a ghost story. for example, in Pausanias’ Description of Greece 6.6.7, there is a delightful story (repeated in more than one form in other authors) of the besting of a ghost of a drunken sailor at that was terrifying a village. One of Odysseus’ men does the needful when he falls in love with the yearly virgin given to appease the murderous ghost. καὶ ἡ παῖς τε συνοικήσειν κατώμνυτο αὐτῷ σώσαντι αὐτὴν καὶ ὁ Εὔθυμος ἐνεσκευασμένος ἔμενε τὴν ἔφοδον τοῦ δαίμονος. ἐνίκα τε δὴ τῇ μάχῃ καὶ – ἐξηλαύνετο γὰρ ἐκ τῆς γῆς – ὁ Ἥρως ἀφανίζεταί τε καταδὺς ἐς θάλασσαν. KAI hH PAIS TE SUNOIKHSEIN KATWMNUTO AUTWi SWSANTI AUTHN KAI hO EUQUMOS ENESKEUASMENOS EMENE THN EFODON TOU DAIMONOS. ENIKA TE DH THi MACHi KAI — EXELAUNETO GAR EK THS GHN — hO HRWS AFANIZETAI TE KATADUS ES QALASSAN. And the girl swore she would be [Euthymos’] wife if he would save her and Euthymos armed himself stayed in the ghost’s [DAIMWN’s] entry way. And he beat it in the fight–he drove him out of the area–the ghost [hHRWS] disappears and plunged into the sea.”The story in Mark 6:49 presents what to me an interesting contrast with the DAIMWN story (Mark 5:1ff) in which the bested LEGIWN also winds up plunging into the sea (in the pigs). I guess the value of the JBL article is that it points out a narrative incongruity in terms of the way Greco-Roman ghosts behave when entering water. I notice that Adela Y. Collins, in her Hermeneia Commentary on Mark gives a favorable nod to Comb’s article. I suppose George has some ancient ghost stories up his sleeve where they walking on water like Jesus? That would be very fun to read, and very illuminating. We can only wonder about the background assumptions and attempt to reconstruct them on the basis of the stories we have. This is something I know very little about, so, don’t hold back on us, George, if you have a neat story of an ancient Greek or Roman ghost walking on the water. It would be interesting to find out if Jewish ghosts behave differently. I suppose that LEGIWN was probably a Greco-Roman ghost (perhaps that’s why he/they apparently sank). The whole water and ghost thing is fascinating, but I’m wondering if in these cases (Mark and Pausanias) the idea is the belief that lakes and seas also were frequently understood to be entrances to Hades.Yancy Smith, PhDyancywsmith at sbcglobal.netY.W.Smith at tcu.eduyancy at wbtc.com5636 Wedgworth RoadFort Worth, TX 76133817-361-7565On Mar 20, 2010, at 12:12 AM, George F Somsel wrote:> It took me a while to locate that particular volume so I could read the article. It seems that the argumentation is rather deficient. While he notes that in certain cases ghosts were thought to be limited by water, it doesn’t seem to establish that it was thus in all cases. Ghosts appear to be conceived as being limited much as humans are by oceans and streams. While water in one citation appears to be able in one case to kill a ghost (sic !) in the play by Apuleus, burial at sea seems to be overcome by the same method as would be the case if the departed had been buried on land but on the other side of water, namely, by calling the dead three times which would indicate that water would not therefore be deemed fatal to the shade. The point of the article seems to be that Jesus is depicted as divine, which may well be the case; but that Mark is constructing a farce on the order of Apuleus is by no means evident. Whether the disciples were to be considered to be credulous is not particularly dependent upon whether the ancients thought water was particularly inimicable to ghosts. I’m not at all accepting of a rule that the ancients considered water to be a kind of garlic or a cross to vampires (for anyone credulous enough to accept their existence). As to whether the word φάντασμα FANTASMA by itself could signify a god is similarly not established since it would appear that when φάντασμα FANTASMA is used to signify some divine being it does not appear by itself but in combination with δαίμονος DAIMONOS so that φάντασμα FANTASMA would seem to signify an apparition which may or may not be divine depending upon whether it is otherwise qualified.> > > george> gfsomsel> > > … search for truth, hear truth, > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, > defend the truth till death.> > > – Jan Hus> _________> > > From: Yancy Smith <yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net>> To: bGreek < at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 2:09:30 PM> Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)> > Mediterranean peoples seem to have known that ghosts couldn’t walk on water, they sink in water. But gods could walk on water. So, when the disciples say Jesus is a ghost, the audience would see to what great extent they were going to avoid the obvious conclusion that Jesus is divine. This point was masterfully brought out in a recent article by Jason Robert Combs, “A Ghost on the Water? Understanding an Absurdity in Mark 6:49-50” JBL 127.2 (2008): 345-58. So, the exclamation by the disciples would have been a further humorous demonstration of obtuseness. They just couldn’t get the point about who Jesus really was and were willing to accept the most preposterous conclusions to avoid the obvious.> > > > > > Yancy Smith> Yancy W. Smith, PhD> World Bible Translation Center> 4028 Daley Ave., Suite 201> Fort Worth, TX 76180> p 817-595-1664> f 817580-7013> yancy at wbtc.org> > Be kinder than necessary for everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.> > > > > —–Original Message—–> From: -bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of George F Somsel> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 3:13 PM> To: theomann at comcast.net; bGreek> Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)> > No, I don’t think you missed a thing. Assuming, for the sake of discussion, that he was supposedly walking “by the sea”, why would this have caused the disciples to think that he was an “apparition” or “ghost”? “Walking by the sea” certainly gives no reason for surprise.> george> gfsomsel > > > … search for truth, hear truth, > learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth, > defend the truth till death.> > > – Jan Hus> _________ > > > > > ________________________________> From: “theomann at comcast.net” <theomann at comcast.net>> To: bGreek < at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 12:56:16 PM> Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)> > > > > Subject: Re: [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) > > Richard wrote: > > <My friend is a pretty bright fellow normally and yet he insists that he > knows of a reputable source of Greek scholarship that upholds this notion of > Jesus “walking by the sea” in Mark’s gospel. So now let me ask this… Does > anyone know of anywhere in Greek literature where “PERIPATWN EPI TH > THALASSH” is used in this way or could be legitimately translated in this > way or where he may have gotten this idea otherwise?> > > _____________________________ > > > > I don’t know if I’m on the same page as you, but is the question whether or not Jesus walked on water? If so, doesn’t the context pretty much dictate that He did? Verse 47 says that the disciples were in a boat in the middle of the sea (lake), verse 48 says that Jesus went out to them and verse 51 says that He climbed into the boat with them. That Jesus walked on the water in order to reach them seems to be the natural conclusion. > Sorry if I’ve misunderstood something. > > > > Ted > > > > Theodore H. Mann > > theomann at comcast.net >> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > > > >> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> >> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> >

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)[] Thread closed: Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)

[] Thread closed: Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Sat Mar 20 06:03:56 EDT 2010

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) [] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49) On Mar 20, 2010, at 3:32 AM, yancywsmith at sbcglobal.net wrote:> George,> OK, I’m pretty sure Carl is going to pounce on me any moment because ghosts and demons might seem to be way of topic for the list. IDOU: EPISKHPTW. PAUSASQAI KELEUW PANTAS TOUS ETI EPIRAPTONTAS KAI FANTASMATA DIWKONTAS.I would have thought it quite enough to note that EPI + genitive regularly means “on the surface of.” BDAG s.v. EPI 1.a.Carl W. ConradCo-Chair, Listrad/

[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)[] Walking on Water (Mk 6:49)

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.