Discovery Box| (0.15) | (Mar 12:13) | 3 sn Pharisees and Herodians made a very interesting alliance. W. W. Wessel (“Mark,” EBC 8:733) comments: “The Herodians were as obnoxious to the Pharisees on political grounds as the Sadducees were on theological grounds. Yet the two groups united in their opposition to Jesus. Collaboration in wickedness, as well as goodness, has great power. Their purpose was to trip Jesus up in his words so that he would lose the support of the people, leaving the way open for them to destroy him.” See also the note on “Herodians” in Mark 3:6. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 12:10) | 1 sn The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone. The use of Ps 118:22-23 and the “stone imagery” as a reference to Christ and his suffering and exaltation is common in the NT (see also Matt 21:42; Luke 20:17; Acts 4:11; 1 Pet 2:6-8; cf. also Eph 2:20). The irony in the use of Ps 118:22-23 in Mark 12:10-11 is that in the OT, Israel was the one rejected (or perhaps her king) by the Gentiles, but in the NT it is Jesus who is rejected by Israel. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 10:4) | 1 sn An allusion to Deut 24:1. The Pharisees were all in agreement that the OT permitted a man to write a certificate of dismissal and divorce his wife (not vice-versa) and that remarriage was therefore sanctioned. But the two rabbinic schools of Shammai and Hillel differed on the grounds for divorce. Shammai was much stricter than Hillel and permitted divorce only in the case of sexual immorality. Hillel permitted divorce for almost any reason (cf. the Mishnah, m. Gittin 9.10). |
| (0.15) | (Mar 8:21) | 2 sn Do you still not understand? The disciples in Mark’s Gospel often misunderstood the miracles of Jesus as well as his teaching. Between Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Mark paints the most revealing portrait of the shortcomings of the Twelve (cf. 6:51-52; 7:17-19; 8:1-10, 14-21, 27-30, 33; 9:5, 10, 33; 10:28, 35-45; 14:19, 29-31, 32-37, 50, 66-72). |
| (0.15) | (Mar 7:11) | 1 sn Corban is a Hebrew loanword (transliterated in the Greek text and in most modern English translations) referring to something that has been set aside as a gift to be given to God at some later date, but which is still in the possession of the owner (L&N 53.22). According to contemporary Jewish tradition the person who made this claim was absolved from responsibility to support or assist his parents, a clear violation of the Mosaic law to honor one’s parents (v. 10). |
| (0.15) | (Mar 6:48) | 5 sn The statement he wanted to pass by them is somewhat difficult to understand. There are at least two common interpretations: (1) it refers to the perspective of the disciples, that is, from their point of view it seemed that Jesus wanted to pass by them; or (2) it refers to a theophany and uses the language of the Greek Old Testament (LXX) when God “passed by” Moses at Sinai (cf. Exod 33:19, 22). According to the latter alternative, Jesus is “passing by” the disciples during their struggle, in order to assure them of his presence with them. See W L. Lane, Mark (NICNT), 236. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 6:41) | 2 tc ‡ Most mss (P45 A D W Θ ƒ1,13 M lat sy) have αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”) after τοῖς μαθηταῖς (tois mathētais, “the disciples”), but several excellent witnesses (א B L Δ 33 579 892 1241 1424) lack the pronoun. This kind of variant is often a predictable expansion of the text; further, that many significant mss lack the pronoun gives support for the shorter reading. For these reasons, the pronoun is considered to be secondary. NA28 puts αὐτοῦ in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 5:7) | 3 sn Though it seems unusual for a demon to invoke God’s name (“I implore you by God”) in his demands of Jesus, the parallel in Matt 8:29 suggests the reason: “Why have you come to torment us before the time?” There was an appointed time in which demons would face their judgment, and they seem to have viewed Jesus’ arrival on the scene as an illegitimate change in God’s plan regarding the time when their sentence would be executed. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 4:41) | 2 sn This section in Mark (4:35-5:43) contains four miracles: (1) the calming of the storm; (2) the exorcism of the demon-possessed man; (3) the giving of life to Jairus’ daughter; (4) the healing of the woman hemorrhaging for twelve years. All these miracles demonstrate Jesus’ right to proclaim the kingdom message and his sovereign authority over forces, directly or indirectly, hostile to the kingdom. The last three may have been brought together to show that Jesus had power over all defilement, since contact with graves, blood, or a corpse was regarded under Jewish law as causing a state of ritual uncleanness. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 3:21) | 1 tc Western witnesses D W it, instead of reading οἱ παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ (hoi par’ autou, here translated “family”), have περὶ αὐτοῦ οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ λοιποί (peri autou hoi grammateis kai hoi loipoi, “[when] the scribes and others [heard] about him”). But this reading is obviously motivated, for it removes the embarrassing statement about Jesus’ family’s opinion of him as “out of his mind” and transfers this view to the Lord’s opponents. The fact that virtually all other witnesses have οἱ παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ here, coupled with the strong internal evidence for the shorter reading, shows this Western reading to be secondary. |
| (0.15) | (Mar 1:5) | 1 tn Grk “And the whole Judean countryside.” Mark uses the Greek conjunction καί (kai) at numerous places in his Gospel to begin sentences and paragraphs. This practice is due to Semitic influence and reflects in many cases the use of the Hebrew ו (vav) which is used in OT narrative, much as it is here, to carry the narrative along. Because in contemporary English style it is not acceptable to begin every sentence with “and,” καί was often left untranslated or rendered as “now,” “so,” “then,” or “but” depending on the context. When left untranslated it has not been noted. When given an alternative translation, this is usually indicated by a note. |
| (0.15) | (Mat 27:29) | 2 sn The crown may have been made from palm spines or some other thorny plant common in Israel. In placing the crown of thorns on his head, the soldiers were unwittingly symbolizing God’s curse on humanity (cf. Gen 3:18) being placed on Jesus. Their purpose would have been to mock Jesus’ claim to be a king; the crown of thorns would have represented the “radiant corona” portrayed on the heads of rulers on coins and other artifacts in the 1st century. |
| (0.15) | (Mat 26:20) | 3 tc Many witnesses, some of them quite significant, have μαθητῶν (mathētōn, “disciples”; א A L W Δ Θ 33 892 1241 1424 pm lat) or μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ (mathētōn autou, “his disciples”; 0281 it) after δώδεκα (dōdeka, “twelve”). However, such clarifications are typical scribal expansions to the text. Further, the shorter reading (the one that ends with δώδεκα) has strong support in P37vid,45vid B D K Γ ƒ1,13 565 579 700 pm. Thus both internally and externally the reading that ends the verse with “the twelve” is to be preferred. |
| (0.15) | (Mat 21:42) | 1 sn The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone. The use of Ps 118:22-23 and the “stone imagery” as a reference to Christ and his suffering and exaltation is common in the NT (see also Mark 12:10; Luke 20:17; Acts 4:11; 1 Pet 2:6-8; cf. also Eph 2:20). The irony in the use of Ps 118:22-23 here is that in the OT, Israel was the one rejected (or perhaps her king) by the Gentiles, but in the NT it is Jesus who is rejected by Israel. |
| (0.15) | (Mat 19:10) | 1 tc ‡ Some significant witnesses, along with the majority of later mss (P25 C D L N W Z Γ Δ 078 ƒ1, 13 33 565 579 700 1241 1424 M lat sy samss bo), read αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”) after μαθηταί (mathētai, “disciples”), but this looks to be a clarifying reading. Other early and significant witnesses lack the pronoun (P71vid א B Θ e ff1 g1 sams mae; SBL), the reading adopted here. NA28 includes the pronoun in brackets, indicating some doubts as to its authenticity. |
| (0.15) | (Mat 19:7) | 1 sn A quotation from Deut 24:1. The Pharisees were all in agreement that the OT permitted a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce his wife (not vice-versa) and that remarriage was therefore sanctioned. But the two rabbinic schools of Shammai and Hillel differed on the grounds for divorce. Shammai was much stricter than Hillel and permitted divorce only in the case of sexual immorality. Hillel permitted divorce for almost any reason (cf. the Mishnah, m. Gittin 9.10). |
| (0.15) | (Mat 15:26) | 2 sn The term dogs does not refer to wild dogs (scavenging animals roaming around the countryside) in this context, but to small dogs taken in as house pets. It is thus not a derogatory term per se, but is instead intended by Jesus to indicate the privileged position of the Jews (especially his disciples) as the initial recipients of Jesus’ ministry. The woman’s response of faith and her willingness to accept whatever Jesus would offer pleased him to such an extent that he granted her request. |
| (0.15) | (Mat 9:1) | 2 sn His own town refers to Capernaum. Capernaum was a town located on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee, 680 ft (204 m) below sea level. It existed since Hasmonean times and was a major trade and economic center in the North Galilean region. The population in the first century is estimated to be around 1,500. Capernaum became the hub of operations for Jesus’ Galilean ministry (Matt 4:13; Mark 2:1). For more information, see the note at Matt 8:5. |
| (0.15) | (Mat 4:21) | 1 tn Or “in their boat.” The phrase ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ (en tō ploiō) can either refer to a generic boat, some boat (as it seems to do here); or it can refer to “their” boat, implying possession. Mark (unlike Matthew) assumes a certain preunderstanding on the part of his readers about the first four disciples and hence in Mark the translation “their boat” is justified (Mark 1:19; cf. also Mark 1:20 in which the “hired men” indicates that Zebedee’s family owned the boats) |
| (0.15) | (Mat 3:14) | 1 tc ‡ The earliest mss (א* B sa) lack the name of John here (“but he tried to prevent him,” instead of “but John tried to prevent him”). It is, however, clearly implied (and is thus supplied in translation). Although the longer reading has excellent support (P96 א1 C Ds L W Γ Δ 0233 0250 ƒ1, 13 33 565 579 700 1241 1424 M lat[t] sy mae bo), it looks to be a motivated and predictable reading. Nevertheless, in light of the strong external support for “John,” it is only slightly more likely that the autographic wording of this verse lacked his name. |
