Exegesis:

Most of the words in this verse have already been dealt with: paraggellei ‘he commands,’ 6.8; anapesein ‘to recline,’ ‘to sit down,’ 6.40; labōn ‘taking,’ 6.41; paratithōsin ‘they may place,’ ‘they may set before,’ 6.41.

eucharistēsas (14.23; cf. eulogeō 6.41) ‘giving thanks (to God).’

eklasen (8.19; 14.22; cf. kataklaō 6.41) ‘he broke.’

Translation:

Commanded the crowd to sit … may be shifted to the direct form as ‘commanded the crowd, Sit down….’

In a number of languages ‘to give thanks’ requires an object. Accordingly, one may translate ‘he gave thanks to God’ or ‘he said to God, Thanks’ (Chicahuaxtla Triqui, Tzeltal).

For broke and gave to the disciples to set before see 6.41.

As in all instances of intra-Gospel parallels, one should attempt to reproduce the identical wording of the Greek text with substantially similar renderings in receptor languages. This may not always be completely possible, for certain minor shifts in wording in the Greek text may call for accompanying adaptations in receptor languages, and hence there cannot be any one-to-one system of exact correspondence. Nevertheless, the degree to which parallelism can be reproduced, whether within a single book or between books, should be a constant concern of the translator. On the other hand, it is not wise to refer to a portion already translated and to take over the wording without examination, for such arbitrary lifting of material out of context may result in very artificial transitions and syntactic relationships, especially in matters of tense sequence, conjunctions, pronominal reference, and aspects of the verb.

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 .

Exegesis:

amēn (cf. 3.28) ‘truly,’ ‘solemnly.’

hoti ‘that’ is recitative, introducing direct speech.

eisin tines hōde tōn hestēkotōn ‘there are some of those standing here,’ ‘some of those here present.’

hōde (cf. 8.4) ‘here.’

hoi hestēkotes ‘those who are standing’: the verb histēmi ‘stand’ is used here in the sense of ‘being’ or ‘existing’ rather than the strictly physical sense of ‘standing’ (Lagrange ‘some of those present’; O Novo Testamento de Nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo. Revisdo Autorizada ‘some of those who are here’).

hoitines ou mē geusōntai thanatou ‘who certainly will not taste death,’ ‘who will by no means die’: the double negative is emphatic, and the statement is a forceful way of saying ‘who certainly will be alive.’

ou mē (9.41; 10.15; 13.2, 19, 30; 14.25, 31; 16.18) ‘not’: an emphatic way of making a negative statement.

geuomai (only here in Mark) ‘taste’: in a figurative sense, as here, ‘experience,’ ‘come to know.’

heōs an idōsin ‘until they see’: the meaning is not that they will die as soon as they see the Kingdom of God come with power; the emphasis is on the fact that during their lifetime they will see the Kingdom come with power.

heōs an (cf. 6.10) ‘until.’

eidein ‘see’: the word should be translated literally, rather than in a figurative manner, e.g. ‘perceive,’ ‘become aware of,’ ‘experience.’ The aorist subjunctive should be simply rendered ‘see’ rather than ‘have seen,’ as some translations have it.

tēn basileian tou theou elēluthuian en dunamei ‘the Kingdom of God having come with power’: the perfect passive participle elēluthuian ‘having come’ functions as an adjective (in the predicate position) which makes an additional statement concerning the Kingdom. It is not, simply, that in their lifetime they will see the Kingdom of God: it is that they will see the Kingdom present (‘having come’) in power. This ‘having come,’ therefore, lies in the future just as much as heōs an idōsin ‘until they see’: it is said that they will see (in the future, within their lifetime) the Kingdom having arrived – which ‘arrival’ is also future in relation to the time of the prediction. A translation should attempt accurately to convey the meaning of the Greek, which is reasonably clear and precise.

(On the interpretation of the passage, see the commentaries in loc.).

hē basileia tou theou (cf. 1.15) ‘the Reign of God’: here spoken of as an ‘event’ (however interpreted), visible in its coming.

elēluthuia ‘having come’: regardless of the interpretation of the verse, the force of the perfect participle should be observed. In Revised Standard Version ‘before they see the kingdom of God come,’ the ‘come’ is ambiguous: it may mean ‘having come,’ but may also mean ‘coming.’

Translation:

Them should refer to the same group as is identified in 8.34, ‘the crowd as well as the disciples.’

For this use of truly, with double type of attribution, see 8.12.

Some standing here, as an expression equivalent to ‘now living,’ may actually be translated in certain languages as ‘some sitting here,’ for ‘sitting’ is in a number of languages of Africa, for example, the verb which by extension also means ‘to live’ or ‘to exist.’

A literal translation of taste death has been understood in some languages to mean ‘partake of a cannibalistic meal.’ The meaning is, of course, ‘to die,’ though in some languages the negative is shifted to the subject constituent rather than to the verb, e.g. ‘not all those here are going to die until they see…’ (Copainalá Zoque). This shift is designed to avoid the tendency to interpret the ‘until’ clause as designating the point at which such persons are to die. In some languages, one can preserve something of the force of the idiom ‘taste death’ by using a parallel ‘feel death’ (Tabasco Chontal), ‘see death’ (Navajo; cf. also Toraja-Sa’dan), and ‘suffer death’ (Highland Puebla Nahuatl).

In some languages the expression ‘see the kingdom’ is impossible, because ‘kingdom’ actually identifies a process of ‘rule’ or ‘ruling’ (see kingdom, 1.15 and 4.11). However, one can often speak of ‘see God ruling,’ which would be the closest equivalent to see the kingdom of God. In other instances one may be able to translate as ‘see that God has now begun to rule with power,’ though this is not a very close approximate.

Power is generally rendered in this context as ‘great authority’ (Tzeltal), or ‘strength to command,’ rather than merely ‘power’ or ‘might,’ if these terms refer primarily to physical prowess or dominance.

It must be recognized that part of the difficulty of translating this verse is the fact that scholars are so divided as to what it actually means. In all fairness to the Scriptures it is best to avoid taking any overly decisive position, or the results may do violence, either to the prediction of Jesus or to the subsequent events of history.

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 .

Text:

Instead of ēlthon ‘they came’ of the majority of modern editions of the Greek text, Textus Receptus and Soden have ēlthen ‘he came.’

Before dielogizesthe ‘you were discussing’ Textus Receptus adds pros heautous ‘among yourselves’; Kilpatrick adds pros heautous after dielogizesthe; all other modern editions of the Greek text omit the two words.

Exegesis:

en tē oikia ‘in the house’: perhaps Peter’s house, which, it would seem, had become Jesus’ “home” in Galilee.

dielogizesthe (cf. 2.6) ‘you were discussing,’ ‘debating (with one another).’

Translation:

Came must often be changed to ‘arrived at,’ because of the problem of narrative perspective. However, in some languages, e.g. Yatzachi Zapotec, there are two words for ‘arriving’; one is used when one arrives at a destination other than one’s home and another when the point of arrival is at home (although in Yatzachi Zapotec there is an additional complication in that in this particular passage the point of arrival must also be related to the home of the narrator). In this passage Jesus was evidently arriving at his “home.”

On the way must be rendered in some languages by an expression containing a verb, ‘as you walked along the path’ (or ‘along the road’), since on the way implies a process of journeying, not simply a position.

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 .

Exegesis:

enagkalisamenos (cf. 9.36) ‘embracing,’ ‘taking into (his) arms.’

kateulogei titheis ‘he blessed laying’: most translations have it simply, ‘he laid (his hands upon them) and blessed.’ The participle titheis ‘laying’ may indicate means ‘by laying (his hands upon them),’ or accompanying circumstances ‘as he laid (his hands upon them)’ (cf. Williams, Zürcher Bibel).

kateulogeō (only here in the N.T.; cf. eulogeō 6.41) ‘bless’: in accordance with the customs of the time, we are to understand that Jesus invoked God’s blessings upon them (‘May God bless you’) rather than pronounced a blessing himself (‘I bless you’). Some commentators and translators understand the preposition kata in this compound verb to have the meaning ‘tenderly,’ ‘warmly,’ ‘lovingly.’ The imperfect of the verb describes Jesus blessing the children one by one, not all at the same time.

tithenai tas cheiras (cf. 5.23 for epitithenai tas cheiras) ‘to lay hands,’ ‘to place (his) hands’: as Lagrange points out, this imposition of hands is the mode of the benediction.

Translation:

Them must refer specifically to the children.

In his arms probably refers to a position on his lap rather than to his simply lifting them up from the ground while he was in a standing position (as a Rabbi he was probably teaching in a seated position). This difference is important in some languages.

For bless see 6.41, but in this instance persons are the object of the blessing, and hence certain adjustments may be required.

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 .

Exegesis:

stas ‘standing,’ ‘standing still’: only here in Mark is histēmi used with the meaning ‘standing still,’ ‘stopping’; elsewhere it means simply ‘to stand.’

tharsei (cf. 6.50) ‘Cheer up!’ ‘Courage!’ ‘Take heart!’

egeire (cf. 1.31) ‘rise,’ ‘stand up.’

Translation:

Said must in some languages occur with an object specifying to whom he spoke. The most likely object would be ‘the disciples.’

Call him implies ‘call him to come’ or ‘summon him,’ not just ‘shout at him.’

For take heart see 6.50.

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 .

Exegesis:

eperōtēsō humas hena logon ‘I will ask you one question’: Lagrange insists that the proper force of hena logon is ‘just one question.’

eperōtaō (cf. 5.9) ‘ask (a question).’

logos ‘word,’ ‘statement’ in this context means ‘question.’

apokrithēte (cf. 8.4) ‘you answer’: the subjunctive here is volitive, with the force of the imperative.

Translation:

Said may need to be translated ‘replied.’

Answer me, and in this type of construction may be treated as a conditional, ‘if you answer me, then I will tell….’

By what authority in this verse can be most satisfactorily treated in many languages as personal, rather than impersonal, e.g. ‘I will tell you who gave me the right to do these things.’

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 .

Exegesis:

hoti ‘that’ introduces direct speech and is thus not translated.

akoue, Israēl ‘hear, o Israel’: this passage (Deut. 6.4), known as the Shemaʿ (the first word in the Hebrew text, ‘hear!’), was repeated twice daily by pious Jews, as the essence of their faith.

kurios ho theos hēmōn kurios heis estin ‘the Lord our God, the Lord is one’ (Revised Standard Version). There is no general agreement as to the precise meaning of this saying, for two reasons: (1) it may be that there are two clauses, with the verb ‘is’ implied in the first one, thus – ‘The Lord (is) our God’; (2) the verb estin ‘is’ at the end of the saying does not define precisely the relation of (the second) kurios ‘Lord’ to heis ‘one,’ which may be understood either, ‘is one Lord,’ or, ‘the Lord is one.’ Nor are matters settled by referring to the Hebrew of Deut 6.4 since that passage, as seen below, is also variously translated.

The majority of translations translate the first four words kurios ho theos hēmōn ‘the Lord our God’; it is on the last three, kurios heis estin, that there is wide disagreement: ‘the Lord is One’ (American Standard Version, Revised Standard Version; Gould, Taylor); ‘is one Lord’ (King James Version, Moffatt, Goodspeed, The Modern Speech New Testament, Williams, Montgomery, Translator’s New Testament, Berkeley; Lagrange); ‘is the only Lord’ (Manson, Le Nouveau Testament. Version Synodale, O Novo Testamento de Nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo. Revisdo Autorizada; cf. Zürcher Bibel ‘only He is Lord’). The Vulgate Dominus Deus noster, Deus unus est, may be equally ambiguous.

The Hebrew YHWH ʾelohenu YHWH echad may be translated: ‘The Lord (i.e. Yahweh) our God is one Lord’ (King James Version, American Standard Version, Revised Standard Version, Zürcher Bibel); ‘The Lord our God the Lord is One’ (Jewish Publication Society); ‘The Lord is our God, the Lord alone’ (Lagrange, Moffatt). The difficulty lies essentially in the question as to whether the declaration has to do with the nature of Yahweh – ‘he is One’ – or to his relation to Israel – ‘he alone is our God.’ The difficulty is still further compounded by the possibility that the saying originally meant one thing and later was taken to mean another.

Where such diversity of possibilities exists, it may be that the best decision is to side with the majority, although any one of the possibilities mentioned above is almost equally defensible from the point of view of the Greek and/or the Hebrew.

Translation:

The first may require the addition of ‘commandment,’ i.e. ‘the first commandment.’

O is only a particle to indicate direct address. The equivalent in other languages may be ‘you,’ e.g. ‘you people of Israel.’

Israel may be rendered merely as a transliterated form or with a classifier, ‘people,’ e.g. ‘people of Israel’ or ‘Israel people.’

In some languages the phrase the Lord our God, which is essentially an appositional expression, requires the use of (1) a copulative: ‘the Lord is our God’ or (2) a paratactic construction: ‘the Lord; he is our God.’

The use of one as the predicate after a copulative verb such as is is a relatively rare type of construction since it would be applied only to expressions in which several different objects are described as being one and the same, a meaning which does not apply to this passage. Accordingly, where that is the likely meaning of ‘is one,’ it is preferable to adopt some other rendering such as ‘one Lord’ or ‘only Lord,’ for One occurs in the passage not as a symbol of the unity of the Lord but as an expression of his exclusiveness and uniqueness. Hence, ‘only’ is often a more satisfactory translation.

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 .

Exegesis:

ouai (14.21) ‘woe!’ ‘alas!’: an interjection expressing pain or displeasure.

tais en gastri enchousais ‘for those who are pregnant,’ ‘for those who are with child.’

tais thēlazousais ‘for those who are nursing (children),’ ‘for those who suckle’: for mothers with small nursing children, and for expectant mothers, flight would be difficult and perilous.

Translation:

Alas is translatable in one of three different ways: (1) by a similar exclamative particle, indicating pity and sympathy (but such particles are not too frequent in languages), (2) by a verbal expression of ‘suffering,’ e.g. ‘those who are pregnant … will suffer’ (Copainalá Zoque), and (3) by an adjectival expression denoting the state of the persons involved, e.g. ‘poor those who are pregnant…’ (Tzeltal).

Are with child is rarely translatable in a literal form. In fact, literal translations usually imply women who are carrying children in their arms and is hence a more or less redundant expression of what occurs in the following phrase. However, there are always expressions for pregnancy in all languages. The trouble is that there are so many, some of which are regarded as vulgar, others as humorous, and still others as proper, though in this latter instance propriety may be dictated by whether a man or a woman is speaking.

In those days should be so construed as to be applicable to both ‘those who are pregnant’ and ‘those who are nursing.’

Give suck must be translated with care in order to avoid possible vulgar expressions and also so as to make certain that the words of Jesus are those which are fitting for a man to utter, since often distinctions are made between men’s and women’s speech at this point.

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 .