Text:
Textus Receptus omits euthus ‘immediately’: its inclusion, however, is accepted by all modern editions of the Greek text.
Revised Standard Version ends the verse at “unclean spirit”: all editions of the Greek text, however, include also in this verse kai anekraxen ‘and he cried out’; the following discussion conforms to the Revised Standard Version division.
Exegesis:
euthus ēn ‘immediately (there) was’: as it stands this phrase is difficult to translate Revised Standard Version “immediately there was” is impossible English, unless was can mean ‘came,’ ‘entered’ (which The Modern Speech New Testament‘s “all at once there was” actually means; cf. Translator’s New Testament, Berkeley: “just then there was”). The weakened sense ‘now’ is adopted by some (Manson; “now … there was”); Moffatt connects ‘immediately’ with ‘cried out’: “who at once shrieked out.” Two alternatives offer themselves: (1) euthus may be understood in a general sense ‘now,’ ‘then’; (2) ēn ‘was’ may be taken as equivalent to egeneto ‘came,’ ‘appeared,’ The second is probably to be preferred, cf. Gould: “No sooner [was Jesus] in the synagogue than this demoniac appeared.” Cf. O Novo Testamento de Nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo. Revisdo Autorizada: Nao tardou que aparecesse. A man with an unclean spirit would not normally be in attendance at the worship service in the synagogue.
anthrōpos ‘man’ here equals the indefinite pronoun tis ‘a certain one.’
ēn pneumati akathartō ‘in an unclean spirit’ (1.26, 27; 3.11, 30; 5.2, 8, 13; 6.7; 7.25; 9.25; cf. pneuma alalon ‘dumb spirit’ 9.17, 25; and to pneuma ‘the spirit’ 9.20).
en ‘in,’ ‘with’ has the force of the Hebrew be with the meaning ‘having’ (cf. 5.2, and Lk. 4.33); Howard (II, 464) calls it a “Semitism of thought.” Arndt & Gingrich translate “under the special influence of a demonic spirit” (cf. Swete “under spiritual influence”), while Lagrange, with particular reference to Rom. 8.9, suggests “a man in whom was an unclean spirit.”
pneuma akatharton is best understood as ‘a spirit (which makes the man) unclean.’ Grant suggests physical impurity; what is probably meant, however, is ceremonial, moral, or spiritual defilement or pollution. Moulton & Milligan quote a magical papyrus in which the word has the “moral sense of an unclean demon” (cf. Zech. 13.2).
Translation:
If was is to be interpreted in the sense of ‘appeared,’ which is probably the most likely (demoniacs would not normally be in a synagogue service since the possession of a spirit would make them unclean and hence ceremonially unacceptable), one may translate ‘right then a man with an unclean spirit appeared.’
There are a number of different ways in which people speak of demon possession: ‘an unclean spirit had hit him’ (Mitla Zapotec), ‘under the control…’ (one Chinese translation), ‘someone hit by an evil spirit’ (Toraja-Sa’dan), ‘… standing around inside of’ (Navajo), ‘a man has an unclean spirit’ and ‘an unclean spirit has a man.’
In many languages it is impossible to distinguish between the word used for ‘spirit’ in this context (speaking of ‘unclean spirit’) and the word for ‘demon.’ Any attempt to make a distinction, when none actually exists in the language in question, may only lead to misunderstanding. Accordingly, unclean spirit may simply be ‘unclean demon.’
At the same time, it is not always easy to distinguish between ‘unclean spirit’ and ‘evil spirit.’ The latter is not too difficult because such spirits are often regarded as morally bad, hence, evil. However, in many cultures there is no use of ‘unclean’ in the sense of ceremonially or religiously unacceptable. Some translators have tried to use the equivalent of ‘dirty demon,’ but this has often appeared to be a very strange expression. What is more, the real significance of the term ‘unclean’ is not primarily the appearance of the spirit itself so much as the fact that the possession of such a spirit made the person in question unclean, i.e. ceremonially in some languages a word meaning ‘unclean’ may have no moral significance, but a term such as ‘ugly’ may. For example, in Tabasco Chontal the closest equivalent of unclean spirit is ‘ugly spirit.’
Since in many languages there are a number of different kinds of spirits, it is of extreme importance that one carefully study all the types and be sure that any word chosen for ‘spirit’ in this context is appropriate. One thing is quite certain, namely, that in most instances it will be different from the word employed in the phrase ‘Holy Spirit.’
Quoted with permission from Bratcher, Robert G. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on the Gospel of Mark. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1961. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .