Text:

This verse is omitted from the Greek editions of Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort, Souter, Nestle, and Taylor; included in brackets in the editions of Vogels, Lagrange, and Merk; added by Textus Receptus, Soden, and Kilpatrick. Omitted by the best manuscripts and many of the early versions, it is not in keeping with Mark’s use of O.T. Scriptures. The scripture quoted is Isa. 53.12 (cf. Lk. 22.37 where it is quoted).

Exegesis:

eplērōthē (cf. 1.15; 14.49) ‘it was fulfilled.’

hē graphē (cf. 12.10) ‘the scripture,’ ‘the passage of Scripture.’

anomōn (not used in Mark) ‘transgressors,’ ‘lawless ones.’

elogisthē (not used in Mark) ‘he was reckoned,’ ‘he was counted.’

Translation:

For scripture see 12.10, and for fulfilled see 14.49.

He was reckoned, if changed into an active form, may be rendered as ‘they counted him with,’ or ‘they thought of him as with.’

Transgressors are ‘those who break the law,’ ‘kill the law,’ or ‘do what is bad.’ In Copainalá Zoque this last clause is rendered as ‘they saw him among the bad men.’

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:

kakeinoi (cf. v. 11) ‘and they.’

apelthontes ‘going away,’ ‘going off’: apparently, from the context, the meaning here is that ‘they went back’ to the city of Jerusalem, where the others were. (Of the twenty-one times Mark uses the verb aperchomai, only once – in 7.30 – can it be taken to mean ‘go back,’ ‘return.’)

tois loipois (cf. Mk. 4.19) ‘to the remaining ones,’ ‘to the rest’: that is, the other disciples, ‘those who had been with him’ of v. 10.

oude ekeinois episteusan ‘neither did they believe them.’

pisteuō (cf. Mk. 1.15) ‘believe,’ ‘have faith.’

Translation:

The rest must very often be translated with a more specific referent, ‘the rest of the disciples’ or ‘the rest of those that had been with him.’

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:

After probas ‘going on’ Textus Receptus adds ekeithen ‘thence,’ which is rejected by all modern editions of the Greek text.

Exegesis:

probainō (only here in Mark) ‘advance,’ ‘go forward.’

oligon ‘a little’ is the accusative of the neuter adjective oligos ‘little,’ used adverbially to modify the verb probainō ‘go forward.’

ton adelphon autou ‘his brother’ refers, of course, to James, not to Zebedee.

kai autous … katartizontas ‘and they (were) mending’: this participial clause is a rather clumsy Greek construction reflecting, as Black points out, its Semitic character. It is best translated by “while (or, when) they were mending…” (cf. also Howard II, 423). The pronoun autous ‘they’ and the participle katartizontas ‘mending’ are in the accusative case because they stand in apposition to Iakōbon kai Iōannēn ‘James and John,’ the direct objects of the verb eiden ‘he saw.’ To translate literally ‘they (or, who) also were … mending’ is inaccurate (The Modern Speech New Testament, Knox, American Standard Version). The best translation will make this clause subordinate to the main one, either in a temporal sense ‘while they were mending’ or as a relative clause ‘who were mending’ (Revised Standard Version).

en tō ploiō ‘in the boat.’ Grant observes that the definite article need not always be translated (cf. Le Nouveau Testament. Version Synodale dans une barque), and Lagrange observes that both in Hebrew and in classical Greek the definite article is used to indicate an object naturally to be found in the situation described. On the other hand, ‘their boat’ (Revised Standard Version, Moffatt, The Modern Speech New Testament, Berkeley) is a possible translation (cf. Turner, and see v. 18 ta diktua ‘their nets’).

katartizontas ta diktua ‘mending the nets.’

katartizō (only here in Mark) “to render artios, i.e. ‘fit,’ ‘complete’ ” (Abbot-Smith). The sense is not exclusively that of repairing; the word means ‘to adjust,’ ‘to put right.’ It may mean here preparing the nets for the next fishing. Moulton & Milligan also give evidence for this meaning of the word. Arndt & Gingrich: “put in order, restore; put into proper condition.”

Translation:

The expression James the son of Zebedee and John his brother can only rarely be translated literally into another language. In general it must be reorganized to fit the syntactic and lexical requirements of the receptor language, e.g. ‘James and John, the sons of Zebedee’ (with the relationship of ‘brother’ left implicit); ‘James and his younger brother John, the sons of Zebedee’ (Highland Oaxaca Chontal); ‘James and his brother John; their father was Zebedee’; or ‘James and John, two brothers, sons of Zebedee’ (Mitla Zapotec). The selection of one of these formulae, or some other, will depend entirely upon what type of expression is the closest natural equivalent in the language into which one is translating.

It is not necessary that the nets of verse 19 be the same as those of 16 and 18. The fact that the men were in the boat may suggest that these were long nets let out from boats. The Greek term translated “mending” in the Revised Standard Version is equivalent to English ‘fixing them up.’

While in some parts of the world it may be impossible to find an indigenous term for boat (e.g. along the Sahara the Mossi people have no word for boat, but they call it a ‘water-box’), in others one is faced with the problem of selecting out of a number of different terms the name of a craft which would be approximately the size and shape of the fishing boats used on the Lake of Galilee. There were obviously different-sized boats employed for fishing on the lake, but it is probably safest to estimate that the boats which the disciples used would be capable of holding anywhere from six to a dozen persons. They were not, however, huge ships, for they could be drawn up on the shore by hand and they were of relatively shallow draft (so that Jesus could speak to the people on the shore, while being only a little distance off the land).

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:

ti ‘why?’: the question is thoroughly rhetorical: ‘Can it be that he thus blasphemes?’ i.e. ‘Why! He thus blasphemes!.’

houtos ‘this one’ is probably contemptuous (cf. Taylor) – perhaps something like ‘this fellow!’

lalei blasphēmei ‘he speaks, he blasphemes’ (disregarding punctuation): although most commentators and translations separate the two verbs, translating blasphēmei ‘he blasphemes,’ Black holds that we have here an example of an Aramaic construction in which the second verb has the force of an adverb, modifying the first one: “What is this man thus blasphemously saying?”

blasphēmei (3.28, 29; 15.29) ‘he blasphemes’; the verb in this passage contemplates God as the object of the blasphemy, ‘to speak impiously (of God),’ ‘to profane (God).’ As such, by O.T. law, it was punishable by death (Lev. 24.15, 16; 1 Kings 21.13).

tis dunatai … ei mē ‘who is able … except…?’: the scribes felt Jesus was usurping the right of God and actually forgiving sins, not simply declaring them to be forgiven, as Nathan did (2 Sam. 12.13).

heis ho theos ‘one, (even) God,’ ‘God alone’: it has been suggested that the phrase means, in accordance with Hebrew theology, ‘the One God.’

Translation:

It is blasphemy is much more conveniently translated as a verb expression, following the Greek text. In almost all languages there are adequate terms for such behavior, but they are quite diverse in form and cultural content: ‘speak evil of God’ (Huanuco Quechua), ‘to hurt God’ (Conob), ‘to break God’s name’ (Southern Bobo Madaré), ‘to spoil the name of God’ (Loma (Liberia)), ‘to insult God’ (Luvale), ‘to slander God’ (Pamona, Malay), ‘to defame God’ (Javanese), ‘to bring curses (or ‘calamitous words’) against God’ (Tae), and ‘to talk to pieces’ (Uab Meto). In some languages translators have introduced an expression here meaning ‘to make oneself equal with God,’ but this does not seem to be required by the context. It is the insulting of God, rather than the usurping of God’s prerogatives, which should be brought out by this second clause. The following sentence specifically indicates the degree to which Jesus was accused of usurping divine authority.

The elliptical expression but God alone, in combination with the preceding clause, must in some languages be expanded into a kind of paratactic expression, ‘Who can forgive sins? Only God can forgive sins.’

The direct discourse of this entire verse must in some languages be introduced more specifically with a verb of direct address, e.g. ‘saying to themselves’ or ‘asking themselves.’ Note that the meaning here is reflexive, not reciprocal, for they did not speak openly to one another but only questioned within their own hearts.

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 onoma ‘name,’ Textus Receptus, Tischendorf, Soden, Souter, Vogels, Lagrange, and Merk have onomata ‘names’; the singular is preferred by Nestle, Westcott and Hort, Taylor and Kilpatrick.

Exegesis:

Iakōbon ton tou Zebedaiou ‘James the son of Zebedee’ (cf. the same construction in 2.14).

Boanērges ‘Boanerges’: cf. Dalman for problems connected with the correct understanding of this proper name, and possible solutions.

huioi brontēs ‘sons of thunder’: the Semitic idiom means that the men thus named are characterized by a wrathful disposition, and so are like thunder (cf. same idiom 2.19 huioi numphōnos ‘sons of the bridegroom’s chamber’).

Translation:

For a discussion of the order of names and attributive expressions in James the son … of James, see 1.19. In this passage a frequently acceptable equivalent is ‘James and his younger brother John, both sons of Zebedee.’

Whom he surnamed Boanerges may be translated as ‘he also called them a second name Boanerges.’ This last term should be transliterated, following the principles of sound equivalence established for the handling of such infrequent proper names.

That is (reflecting Greek ho estin) is a kind of formula for ‘which means.’ The interpretation of such strange names in a language may need to be introduced as ‘which means in our language’ or ‘which tries to say.’

Sons of thunder, translated literally, has been misunderstood in a number of translations in which readers have assumed that Jesus was actually describing these men as the supernatural offspring of the local deity “Thunder” (the fact that the men had a stated human father seemed either noncontradictory, or as in one instance, Zebedee was taken to be the name of Thunder). In order that the reader may understand precisely what is the meaning of this Semitic idiom, many translations have used certain equivalent phrases, e.g. ‘men like thunder’ (San Mateo del Mar Huave, Navajo, Central Pame), ‘sons like thunder’ (Amganad Ifugao), and ‘men who are strong like thunder’ (Highland Puebla Nahuatl , Highland Oaxaca Chontal). In some languages one may find that the phrase ‘sons of thunder’ is already in use in a very specialized meaning. For example, in Chicahuaxtla Triqui the expression is the name of a small toad, so named after an ancient pagan rain god. However, by changing the phrase somewhat by the introduction of ‘noise,’ the proper referent was understood, e.g. ‘sons of the noise of thunder.’

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 .