From: Ben Crick (ben.crick@argonet.co.uk)
Date: Tue Jul 08 1997 - 12:37:06 EDT
On Mon 7 Jul 97 (14:03:54), mike.hawkins@exchange1.echostar.com wrote:
> Could you please help me as to why some/ most versions omit this
> expression?
Dear Mike,
Here is CEB Cranfield's comment ad loc:
"19 'AFEDRW~NA. 'AFEDRW/N = classical AFODOS or APOPATOS = 'a privy'.
Instead of this word D reads OCETON, which Wellhausen and Torrey accept and
take to mean 'bowel', and, in spite of the breach of grammatical concord,
take with KAQERIZWN, translating 'the bowel which purifies all foods'. But
such violence is unnecessary; for OCETON in D probably means 'sewer' (as in
Herodian v.8.9, etc.), and anyway AFEDRWNA should surely be read. Here the
natural process is spoken of with unselfconscious naturalness (cf. Schlatter,
/Evang. Matt./ p. 486).
"After EKPOREUETAI it is best to put a question-mark and a dash (EIS TON
AFEDRWNA EKPOREUETAI being the end of what Jesus says). The words KAQERIZWN
PANTA TA BRWMATA are best explained as the evangelist's own comment, drawing
out the implications of Jesus' words with an eye to the contemporary problem
of what was to be the Church's attitude to Jewish ideas about clean and
unclean foods. Cf our explanation of ii.10,28. This interpretation goes back
to the Greek Fathers. The words are then grammatically dependent on KAI LEGEI
AUTOIS at the beginning of verse 18, KAQARIZWN agreeing with the subject of
LEGEI".
(CEB Cranfield, /The Gospel according to St Mark/, Cambridge, 1959, p 181).
HTH
-- Revd Ben Crick, BA Bristol, 1963 (hons in Theology) <ben.crick@argonet.co.uk> 232 Canterbury Road, Birchington, Kent, CT7 9TD (UK)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:21 EDT