The Form of the Bartimaeus Narrative (Mark 10.46–52)
Opinions differ concerning the form of the Bartimaeus narrative in Mark 10. 46–52. M. Dibelius considered it to be a ‘less pure type’ of paradigm, although in the first edition of his work he analysed it as a ‘Personal Legend’. R. Bultmann thought the story showed secondary characteristics and the c...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
1986
|
| In: |
New Testament studies
Year: 1986, Volume: 32, Issue: 4, Pages: 583-595 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | Opinions differ concerning the form of the Bartimaeus narrative in Mark 10. 46–52. M. Dibelius considered it to be a ‘less pure type’ of paradigm, although in the first edition of his work he analysed it as a ‘Personal Legend’. R. Bultmann thought the story showed secondary characteristics and the close interlacing of the story into the Marcan context betrayed the ‘late formulation’ of the present form. He believed, however, that it is hardly possible to recognize a stylistically proper miracle narrative at the basis of this passage. Since R. Bultmann, most authors classify the Bartimaeus narrative as a miracle story but some hasten to point out how the story lacks certain formal elements of a miracle story. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-8145 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: New Testament studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0028688500014223 |