Text:
After aphethē autois ‘it be forgiven them’ Textus Receptus adds ta hamartēmata ‘the sins,’ which is omitted by all modern editions of the Greek text.
Exegesis:
This verse poses great difficulties to the interpreter; to the translator, however, there are somewhat fewer complications, for despite the difficulties in understanding, it should be rendered in a simple, straightforward manner.
hina ‘in order that’ expresses purpose. As the commentators note, with special reference to the divine will, purpose and result in Jewish thought are united into one. The words which follow are a free paraphrase of Isa. 6.9-10.
blepontes blepōsin … akouontes akouōsin ‘seeing they may see … hearing they may hear’: a Semitic way of intensive statement: ‘that they may look and look … that they may listen and listen.’
kai mē idōsin … kai mē suniōsin ‘and not see … and not understand,’ i.e. ‘yet not really see … yet not understand at all.’
suniēmi (or, suniō) (6.52; 7.14; 8.17, 21) ‘understand,’ ‘comprehend,’ ‘gain insight.’
mēpote epistrepsōsin ‘lest they should turn,’ ‘so that they should not turn.’
mēpote ‘lest’: denotes purpose ‘in order that … not’: cf. O Novo Testamento de Nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo. Revisdo Autorizada para que não; Zürcher Bibel damit … nicht etwa.
epistrephō (5.30; 8.33; 13.16) ‘turn,’ ‘return’: in the spiritual sense of repent (cf. Acts 3.19, 26.20). The equivalent of the O.T. shuv ‘turn’: cf. 1.4 on metanoia ‘repentance.’
kai aphethē autois ‘and it be forgiven them’: that is, ‘and God should forgive them.’ Cf. aphiēmi ‘forgive’ in 2.5, and aphesis ‘forgiveness’ 1.4.
Translation:
It is not always easy to relate the purpose clause of verse 12 to the preceding expression in verse 11. In some languages one may insert a transitional element ‘this happens in order that….’
Despite those who would assume some sort of result clause at this point, rather than purpose, it seems quite certain that Mark meant to express the purpose of God’s way of revealing the mystery, an aspect of the providence of God which is almost incomprehensible to man, but which is as much a part of the Biblical perspective as any other (cf. God’s hardening of Pharaoh’s heart). To try to “water down” or alter this essential meaning which Mark evidently intended at this point is to do violence to one’s commission as a translator.
These clauses pose a problem in some languages because of the positive-negative sequence within the purpose clause itself. In other words there are two purposes, one that people may see, but at the same time not perceive (the parallel is that they may hear, but at the same time do not understand). The first of these must be considered as a kind of concessive clause in some languages, and placed after the primary purpose (in this case the negative purpose), e.g. ‘in order that it may not reach the heart (i.e. perceive), even though the people look and look at; and in order that they may not understand it, even though they listen and listen’ (Tzeltal). In other languages the order of the Greek may be retained, and the concessive clause preposed, e.g. ‘it is for this reason that though they look and look they do not see….’ (Yaka).
To turn again is the translation of the Greek word traditionally rendered as ‘to be converted.’ This type of expression is translated in a number of ways in different languages, e.g. ‘to change completely’ (Barrow Eskimo), ‘to turn around’ (Western Highland Purepecha), ‘to have one’s life changed’ (Highland Totonac), ‘to make pass over bounds within’ (Huautla Mazatec), ‘turn the heart toward God’ (San Blas Kuna), ‘the heart turns itself back’ (Chol), ‘self-heart change’ (Highland Puebla Nahuatl), ‘to turn away from, unlearn something’ (Pamona), ‘to turn around from the breast’ (Tepeuxila Cuicatec), and ‘to return’ (Luvale). One of the difficult distinctions to be made in translating is the difference between repentance and conversion, words which in some contexts are not perceptively different in areas of meaning. Both are closely related spiritual experiences, but the one is generally described as preceding the other and the second as being a more complete transformation than the former. The following contrasting sets are illustrative: (see table|fig:Table_MRK4-12.htm)
The final clause introduced by lest in English is an expression of negative purpose, which is dependent, not upon the immediately preceding clause, but upon the final clause of verse 11. Because of the grammatical distance involved in this relationship, one must introduce in some languages a further transitional element, ‘this has happened in order that….’
For forgiveness see 1.4.
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 .