Mark 12:18-27 Greek for "living"

Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Post Reply
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Mark 12:18-27 Greek for "living"

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Am I missing something obvious here in the Greek? There doesn't seem to be any verbs in the green that suggest that the statement in the red is true.
Mark 12:18-27 wrote:Καὶ ἔρχονται Σαδδουκαῖοι πρὸς αὐτόν , οἵτινες λέγουσιν ἀνάστασιν μὴ εἶναι· καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτόν, λέγοντες, Διδάσκαλε, Μωσῆς ἔγραψεν ἡμῖν, ὅτι ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ, καὶ καταλίπῃ γυναῖκα, καὶ τέκνα μὴ ἀφῇ, ἵνα λάβῃ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ· ἑπτὰ ἀδελφοὶ ἦσαν · καὶ ὁ πρῶτος ἔλαβεν γυναῖκα , καὶ ἀποθνῄσκων οὐκ ἀφῆκεν σπέρμα· καὶ ὁ δεύτερος ἔλαβεν αὐτήν, καὶ ἀπέθανεν, καὶ οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἀφῆκεν σπέρμα· καὶ ὁ τρίτος ὡσαύτως. Καὶ ἔλαβον αὐτὴν οἱ ἑπτά , καὶ οὐκ ἀφῆκαν σπέρμα. Ἐσχάτη πάντων ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἡ γυνή.

Ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει, ὅταν ἀναστῶσιν, τίνος αὐτῶν ἔσται γυνή ; Οἱ γὰρ ἑπτὰ ἔσχον αὐτὴν γυναῖκα .

Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Οὐ διὰ τοῦτο πλανᾶσθε, μὴ εἰδότες τὰς γραφάς, μηδὲ τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ θεοῦ; Ὅταν γὰρ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῶσιν, οὔτε γαμοῦσιν, οὔτε γαμίσκονται, ἀλλ’ εἰσὶν ὡς ἄγγελοι οἱ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. Περὶ δὲ τῶν νεκρῶν, ὅτι ἐγείρονται, οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ Μωσέως, ἐπὶ τοῦ βάτου, ὡς εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεός, λέγων, Ἐγὼ ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραάμ, καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰσαάκ, καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰακώβ; Οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ θεὸς νεκρῶν, ἀλλὰ θεὸς ζώντων· ὑμεῖς οὖν πολὺ πλανᾶσθε.
Is there something here that implies the ζώντων = living in the hope of resurrection? Is there an implication from something in that underlined sentence that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are not dead? I don't see that the one is the logical proof of the other.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Mark 12:18-27 Greek for "living"

Post by cwconrad »

Stephen Hughes wrote:Am I missing something obvious here in the Greek? There doesn't seem to be any verbs in the green that suggest that the statement in the red is true.
Mark 12:18-27 wrote:Καὶ ἔρχονται Σαδδουκαῖοι πρὸς αὐτόν , οἵτινες λέγουσιν ἀνάστασιν μὴ εἶναι· καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτόν, λέγοντες, Διδάσκαλε, Μωσῆς ἔγραψεν ἡμῖν, ὅτι ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ, καὶ καταλίπῃ γυναῖκα, καὶ τέκνα μὴ ἀφῇ, ἵνα λάβῃ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ· ἑπτὰ ἀδελφοὶ ἦσαν · καὶ ὁ πρῶτος ἔλαβεν γυναῖκα , καὶ ἀποθνῄσκων οὐκ ἀφῆκεν σπέρμα· καὶ ὁ δεύτερος ἔλαβεν αὐτήν, καὶ ἀπέθανεν, καὶ οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἀφῆκεν σπέρμα· καὶ ὁ τρίτος ὡσαύτως. Καὶ ἔλαβον αὐτὴν οἱ ἑπτά , καὶ οὐκ ἀφῆκαν σπέρμα. Ἐσχάτη πάντων ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἡ γυνή.

Ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει, ὅταν ἀναστῶσιν, τίνος αὐτῶν ἔσται γυνή ; Οἱ γὰρ ἑπτὰ ἔσχον αὐτὴν γυναῖκα .

Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Οὐ διὰ τοῦτο πλανᾶσθε, μὴ εἰδότες τὰς γραφάς, μηδὲ τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ θεοῦ; Ὅταν γὰρ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῶσιν, οὔτε γαμοῦσιν, οὔτε γαμίσκονται, ἀλλ’ εἰσὶν ὡς ἄγγελοι οἱ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. Περὶ δὲ τῶν νεκρῶν, ὅτι ἐγείρονται, οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ Μωσέως, ἐπὶ τοῦ βάτου, ὡς εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεός, λέγων, Ἐγὼ ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραάμ, καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰσαάκ, καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰακώβ; Οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ θεὸς νεκρῶν, ἀλλὰ θεὸς ζώντων· ὑμεῖς οὖν πολὺ πλανᾶσθε.
Is there something here that implies the ζώντων = living in the hope of resurrection? Is there an implication from something in that underlined sentence that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are not dead? I don't see that the one is the logical proof of the other.
FWIW, as I read it, the text is asserting that God is a) the god of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and b) the god of those who are alive, and that therefore, c) Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive - now! God is not the god of corpses.
Perhaps I am myself misunderstanding this, but I don't see your problem.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Mark 12:18-27 Greek for "living"

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Is it a word play on the meaning of animal and spiritual life?

It reads more convincingly in English were the "is" is supplied.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Mark 12:18-27 Greek for "living"

Post by cwconrad »

Stephen Hughes wrote:Is it a word play on the meaning of animal and spiritual life?

It reads more convincingly in English were the "is" is supplied.
What is it that's not clear about the difference between νεκρῶν and ζώντων? As I see it, νεκρῶν does not mean the same thing as τεθνηκότων. The implication is surely that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive, although nothing is said that would characterize the nature of their life -- animal, vegetable, mineral, spiritual, whatever. Our wanting to know more than we are told should not blind us to what we have been told.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Non-verbal sentences - time reference

Post by Stephen Hughes »

This is one of those places where knowing Greek raises a lot of questions.
cwconrad wrote:What is it that's not clear about the difference between νεκρῶν and ζώντων?
Of course that is clear, what is not clear is why Ἐγὼ ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραάμ κτλ. is used to support that statement.
Mark 12:26 wrote:οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ Μωσέως, ἐπὶ τοῦ βάτου, ὡς εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεός, λέγων, Ἐγὼ ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραάμ, καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰσαάκ, καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰακώβ
In any other case, if the copula is not supplied in a non-verbal sentence like Ἐγὼ ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραάμ, we would choose to supply the tense of the verbs that are present, but there is no suitable verb here. The nearest one is εἶπεν, but refers to the time at the burning bush from our perspectiuve.

Seeing God introduce himself to Moses at the time of the burning bush, would it be equally possible to say, I was the God of Abraham, and (then) of Isaac, and (then) of Jacob, {and now I will be your God too - I'm the one who has always been here}. i.e. They are dead, and now I'll walk with you?

Do non-verbal sentences have a timelessness that implies they are true in all circumstances / at all times? Is that strong enough to build an argument on?
cwconrad wrote:Our wanting to know more than we are told should not blind us to what we have been told.
Οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ θεὸς νεκρῶν
Is there a sense of either θεὸς or Οὐκ ἔστιν could be understood, so that we could be blinded to what this does say?

Another problem I have is taking this statement in context with things like
1 Corinthians 15:42, 52 wrote:ἡ ἀνάστασις τῶν νεκρῶν.... καὶ οἱ νεκροὶ ἐγερθήσονται ἄφθαρτοι
Are there two distinct and easily identifiable senses of νεκρός? Is it okay to transfer the meaning of the singular (or plural if there ARE more than one corpses) to the set phrase of the plual οἱ νεκροί?
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Mark 12:18-27 Greek for "living"

Post by cwconrad »

I'm going to opt out of this discussion; it seems to me that it has crossed over from interpretation of a specific text to a broader question of interrelation of disparate Biblical texts and discussion of doctrine. That kind of discussion lies outside the scope of this forum, in my opinion.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Einstein's bicycle

Post by Stephen Hughes »

cwconrad wrote:I'm going to opt out of this discussion; it seems to me that it has crossed over from interpretation of a specific text to a broader question of interrelation of disparate Biblical texts and discussion of doctrine. That kind of discussion lies outside the scope of this forum, in my opinion.
My thinking behind posting that wasn't disparity / harmonisation or doctrine, but rather Einstein. While I was looking for my present signature quote about explaining things to a six year old, I came across this one too:
Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving.
It seemed to me that the slower one rides across this text, the more likely one is to fall off. Here more than other places, the meaning is lost without the context and the flow.
Stephen Hughes wrote:
Mark 12: wrote:Οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ θεὸς νεκρῶν, ἀλλὰ θεὸς ζώντων·
Is there a sense of either θεὸς or Οὐκ ἔστιν could be understood, so that [it doesn't seem that God is not involved in the realm of the dead.]
My opinion is that the ἔστιν is a very limited word here, meaning "is (in this (Old Testament) passage)", and can't really be looked at too closely to make a blanket statement about God.

The question arising from this tread for me is not doctrinal, but syntactical; whether οὐ ... ἀλλά ... in and of itself is ever used in the sense of οὐ μόνον ... ἀλλὰ καὶ ... That is to say that I am wondering whether the constuction is an intensified / explicated expression of a particular meaning of οὐ ... ἀλλά ... (a subset of that construction) or needs to be treated independently.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Mark 12:18-27 Greek for "living"

Post by David Lim »

Stephen Hughes wrote:Am I missing something obvious here in the Greek? There doesn't seem to be any verbs in the green that suggest that the statement in the red is true.
Mark 12:18-27 wrote:Καὶ ἔρχονται Σαδδουκαῖοι πρὸς αὐτόν , οἵτινες λέγουσιν ἀνάστασιν μὴ εἶναι· καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτόν, λέγοντες, Διδάσκαλε, Μωσῆς ἔγραψεν ἡμῖν, ὅτι ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ, καὶ καταλίπῃ γυναῖκα, καὶ τέκνα μὴ ἀφῇ, ἵνα λάβῃ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ· ἑπτὰ ἀδελφοὶ ἦσαν · καὶ ὁ πρῶτος ἔλαβεν γυναῖκα , καὶ ἀποθνῄσκων οὐκ ἀφῆκεν σπέρμα· καὶ ὁ δεύτερος ἔλαβεν αὐτήν, καὶ ἀπέθανεν, καὶ οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἀφῆκεν σπέρμα· καὶ ὁ τρίτος ὡσαύτως. Καὶ ἔλαβον αὐτὴν οἱ ἑπτά , καὶ οὐκ ἀφῆκαν σπέρμα. Ἐσχάτη πάντων ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἡ γυνή.

Ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει, ὅταν ἀναστῶσιν, τίνος αὐτῶν ἔσται γυνή ; Οἱ γὰρ ἑπτὰ ἔσχον αὐτὴν γυναῖκα .

Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, Οὐ διὰ τοῦτο πλανᾶσθε, μὴ εἰδότες τὰς γραφάς, μηδὲ τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ θεοῦ; Ὅταν γὰρ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῶσιν, οὔτε γαμοῦσιν, οὔτε γαμίσκονται, ἀλλ’ εἰσὶν ὡς ἄγγελοι οἱ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. Περὶ δὲ τῶν νεκρῶν, ὅτι ἐγείρονται, οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ Μωσέως, ἐπὶ τοῦ βάτου, ὡς εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεός, λέγων, Ἐγὼ ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραάμ, καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰσαάκ, καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰακώβ; Οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ θεὸς νεκρῶν, ἀλλὰ θεὸς ζώντων· ὑμεῖς οὖν πολὺ πλανᾶσθε.
Is there something here that implies the ζώντων = living in the hope of resurrection? Is there an implication from something in that underlined sentence that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are not dead? I don't see that the one is the logical proof of the other.
I'm going to offer what I think is a logical interpretation of the text, but feel free to reject it on your own grounds. :)

The author writes that a group of Sadducees, who say that there isn't a resurrection, asks Jesus a question implying that there is an inconsistency between resurrection and their perception of marriage. Jesus' answer has two parts, firstly that they are mistaken about marriage in the heavens, and secondly ("περι δε των νεκρων") that they are mistaken about the lack of resurrection (presumably implying that he knew what they were trying to get at with their question). So the second part does not follow from the first part. Instead, Jesus is saying that if they accept God as being called "the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob" even though Abraham and Isaac and Jacob had already been dead at the point God chose to describe himself that way, then they should accept that God would raise Abraham and Isaac and Jacob to life again otherwise he could no longer be called their God if they would no longer exist. I do not think that Jesus' words imply that they are currently alive in some way.
δαυιδ λιμ
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: Einstein's bicycle

Post by David Lim »

Stephen Hughes wrote:The question arising from this tread for me is not doctrinal, but syntactical; whether οὐ ... ἀλλά ... in and of itself is ever used in the sense of οὐ μόνον ... ἀλλὰ καὶ ... That is to say that I am wondering whether the constuction is an intensified / explicated expression of a particular meaning of οὐ ... ἀλλά ... (a subset of that construction) or needs to be treated independently.
As for this question, I consider "ο θεος νεκρων" to mean something like "dead people's God", and so not being such a God would be understood simply as that for God to be someone's God that someone has to live, since dead people cannot 'have' a God. The conclusion then would be that even though Abraham died, he must live again so that God can continue being Abraham's God. Therefore in my opinion the issue is not really a matter of syntax and is inseparable from the interpretation of the phrases.
δαυιδ λιμ
cwconrad
Posts: 2112
Joined: May 5th, 2011, 5:52 pm
Location: Burnsville, NC 28714
Contact:

Re: Mark 12:18-27 Greek for "living"

Post by cwconrad »

If anything, I'd simply like to add here what I think is really pretty clear from the outset: the problem being raised here and the solution(s) being offered don't hinge on the phrasing of the Greek text.
οὔτοι ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς πάντα θεοὶ θνητοῖς ὑπέδειξαν,
ἀλλὰ χρόνῳ ζητέοντες ἐφευρίσκουσιν ἄμεινον. (Xenophanes, Fragment 16)

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”