Difference between revisions of "Bartimaeus"
(Created page with "Bartimaeus <ref name="term_1728" /> <p> '''''bar''''' -'''''ti''''' -'''''mē´us''''' ( Βαρτίμαιος , <i> '''''Bartı́maios''''' </i> ): A hybrid word from Aramaic...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<p> '''''bar''''' -'''''ti''''' -'''''mē´us''''' ( Βαρτίμαιος , <i> '''''Bartı́maios''''' </i> ): A hybrid word from Aramaic <i> '''''bar''''' </i> = "son," and [[Greek]] <i> '''''timaios''''' </i> = "honorable." For the improbability of the derivation from <i> '''''bar''''' </i> - <i> '''''tim''''' </i> ' <i> '''''ai''''' </i> = "son of the unclean," and of the allegorical meaning = the [[Gentiles]] or spiritually blind, see Schmiedel in <i> [[Encyclopedia]] Biblica </i> . In Mk ( Mark 10:46-52 ) [[Bartimeus]] is given as the name of a blind beggar, whose eyes [[Jesus]] [[Christ]] opened as He went out from [[Jericho]] on His last journey to Jerusalem. An almost identical account is given by Lk ( Luke 18:35-43 ), except that the incident occurred "as he drew nigh unto Jericho," and the name of the blind man is not given. Again, according to Mt ( Matthew 20:29-34 ), "as they went out from Jericho" (like Mk) <i> two </i> blind men (unlike Mk and Lk) receive their sight. It is not absolutely impossible that two or even three events are recorded, but so close is the similarity of the three accounts that it is highly improbable. Regarding them as referring to the same event, it is easy to understand how the discrepancies arose in the passage of the story from mouth to mouth. The main incident is clear enough, and on purely historical grounds, the miracle cannot be denied. The discrepancies themselves are evidence of the wide currency of the story before our [[Gospels]] assumed their present form. It is only a most mechanical theory of inspiration that would demand their harmonization. </p> | |||
<p> '''''bar''''' -'''''ti''''' -'''''mē´us''''' ( Βαρτίμαιος , <i> '''''Bartı́maios''''' </i> ): A hybrid word from Aramaic <i> '''''bar''''' </i> = "son," and Greek <i> '''''timaios''''' </i> = "honorable." For the improbability of the derivation from <i> '''''bar''''' </i> - <i> '''''tim''''' </i> ' <i> '''''ai''''' </i> = "son of the unclean," and of the allegorical meaning = the Gentiles or spiritually blind, see Schmiedel in <i> Encyclopedia Biblica </i> . In Mk ( Mark 10:46-52 ) Bartimeus is given as the name of a blind beggar, whose eyes Jesus Christ opened as He went out from Jericho on His last journey to Jerusalem. An almost identical account is given by Lk ( Luke 18:35-43 ), except that the incident occurred "as he drew nigh unto Jericho," and the name of the blind man is not given. Again, according to Mt ( Matthew 20:29-34 ), "as they went out from Jericho" (like Mk) <i> two </i> blind men (unlike Mk and Lk) receive their sight. It is not absolutely impossible that two or even three events are recorded, but so close is the similarity of the three accounts that it is highly improbable. Regarding them as referring to the same event, it is easy to understand how the discrepancies arose in the passage of the story from mouth to mouth. The main incident is clear enough, and on purely historical grounds, the miracle cannot be denied. The discrepancies themselves are evidence of the wide currency of the story before our Gospels assumed their present form. It is only a most mechanical theory of inspiration that would demand their harmonization. </p | |||
Revision as of 13:28, 6 October 2021
bar -ti -mē´us ( Βαρτίμαιος , Bartı́maios ): A hybrid word from Aramaic bar = "son," and Greek timaios = "honorable." For the improbability of the derivation from bar - tim ' ai = "son of the unclean," and of the allegorical meaning = the Gentiles or spiritually blind, see Schmiedel in Encyclopedia Biblica . In Mk ( Mark 10:46-52 ) Bartimeus is given as the name of a blind beggar, whose eyes Jesus Christ opened as He went out from Jericho on His last journey to Jerusalem. An almost identical account is given by Lk ( Luke 18:35-43 ), except that the incident occurred "as he drew nigh unto Jericho," and the name of the blind man is not given. Again, according to Mt ( Matthew 20:29-34 ), "as they went out from Jericho" (like Mk) two blind men (unlike Mk and Lk) receive their sight. It is not absolutely impossible that two or even three events are recorded, but so close is the similarity of the three accounts that it is highly improbable. Regarding them as referring to the same event, it is easy to understand how the discrepancies arose in the passage of the story from mouth to mouth. The main incident is clear enough, and on purely historical grounds, the miracle cannot be denied. The discrepancies themselves are evidence of the wide currency of the story before our Gospels assumed their present form. It is only a most mechanical theory of inspiration that would demand their harmonization.
