Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [textualcriticism] Re: Mark 1:41 - Kirsopp Lake Had an Idea

Expand Messages
  • Jeff Cate
    Correction: In my last paragraph, I meant to say IRATUS on the Latin side of Bezae, not MISERTUS. --Jeff Cate, Riverside, CA ... From: Jeff Cate
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 2, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Correction: In my last paragraph, I meant to say "IRATUS" on the Latin side of Bezae, not "MISERTUS."

      --Jeff Cate,
      Riverside, CA

      ---------- Original Message ----------
      From: "Jeff Cate" <Jeffcate@...>
      To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: Re: [textualcriticism] Re: Mark 1:41 - Kirsopp Lake Had an Idea
      Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 16:48:57 GMT


      Interesting discussion on an interesting variant.

      Instead of wondering if a copyist misunderstood Mark, I've wondered if we are the ones who have misunderstood Mark...

      What did the evangelist intend by SPLAGXNIZOMAI in 1:41 (and also in 8:2; 6:34; and 9:22)? A hundred years ago, Swete mentioned that Mark's use of SPLAGXNIZOMAI is the earliest known usage of the verb in a *metaphorical* sense. Prior to that, the verb is only known to be used in a literal sense for the eating of the entrails of an animal sacrifice. Even Lightfoot noted that this verb does not seem to originate from classical Greek and was perhaps a coinage of the Jewish diaspora.


      Obviously, the verb is based on the noun SPLAGXNA which had already been used metaphorically for a long, long time. And Helmut Koester in the TDNT cites plenty of examples in which SPLAGXNA early on didn't merely refer to the emotion of love/compassion, but any strong impulsive emotion even anger, lust, and jealousy.


      So if Mark is the first or one of the first to use the *verb* SPLAGXNIZOMAI (not the noun) in a metaphorical sense, how do we know he intended it to mean "moved with compassion"? Could it be possible that the verb was intended as "moved with anger" (not compassion) and that's why Matthew and Luke omit the participle?


      And then when SPLAGXNISQEIS in Mk 1:41 was translated over in Old Latin mss, translators would have a dilemma... how to render the emotion of the verb in Latin. In Latin, the noun VISCERA is the equivalent to the Greek noun SPLAGXNA, but there is no Latin verb for the Greek verb SPLAGXNIZOMAI. So an interpretive decision would have to be made... was SPLAGXNISQEIS implying anger (Latin IRATUS) or compassion (Latin MISERTUS). And then maybe the use of MISERTUS on the Latin side of Codex Bezae is what caused the nearly unique Greek reading ORGISQEIS (essentially, cross-pollenization from the Latin side to the Greek side of the bi-lingual codex). (I say "nearly unique" since that reading is also found in 1358 as Wieland notes.)

      Anyway, just some of my thoughts on the issue...

      --Jeff Cate,
      Riverside, CA

      ---------- Original Message ----------
      From: "james_snapp_ jr" <voxverax@yahoo. com>
      To: textualcriticism@ yahoogroups. com
      Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: Mark 1:41 - Kirsopp Lake Had an Idea
      Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 12:15:36 -0000



      Hm; I remember reading the textual commentary but I must've forgotten that part (which I re-read just now.)

      Something occurs to me: suppose a bold but inexperienced copyist read the Alexandrian text of Mark 1:41 in his exemplar and misinterpreted it so as to construe it to mean the same thing that Lake proposes that the Western reading means – with the difference that this copyist, reading the Alexandrian text, thought that the text said that the leper was the person filled with compassion! Such a copyist might conclude that the producer of his exemplar wrote nonsense, and replace the nonsensical- seeming word with the most similar word he could think of that seemed sensible.

      Yours in Christ,

      James Snapp, Jr.

      ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ ___
      Refi: As low as 3.32% APR
      Home loan APRs as low as 3.32% APR. $200,000 for $884/mo. LendingTree®
      LendingTree. com

      Refi - Low as 3.32% APR
      Homeowners: Refi before rates rise. $300k for $1,306/mo. No SSN req'd
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.