巴底买的“属灵的盲目”(马可福音10:46-52):走向去中心化的Ableist阅读

JP O’Connor
{"title":"巴底买的“属灵的盲目”(马可福音10:46-52):走向去中心化的Ableist阅读","authors":"JP O’Connor","doi":"10.1163/15685152-20231721","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract It is commonly acknowledged that blindness and seeing play an important role in the theology of the Gospel of Mark. Typically, readers interpret “spiritual blindness” as the moral thrust of the discipleship discourse in Mark 8:22–10:52. While the disciples fail to see their teacher as the Christ, blind Bartimaeus appears to identify Jesus as the “Son of David” (10:46–52). However, centering blindness-as-vice not only plays on an unfortunate ableist binary but also renders Mark’s more marginal characters as insignificant. Research on blindness in antiquity demonstrates how socioeconomic status was a leading factor in determining social perceptions of the blind. This article contends that Mark’s Bartimaeus pericope should be read accordingly. Instead of serving as a metaphor for “spiritual blindness,” physically blind characters are raised to the status of insider as a condemnation of mistreatment of the poor—a motif found within the broader terrain of Mark’s moral landscape (6:30–44; 8:1–10; 12:38–44; 14:1–11).","PeriodicalId":43103,"journal":{"name":"Biblical Interpretation-A Journal of Contemporary Approaches","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Spiritual Blindness’ in the Bartimaeus Pericope (Mark 10:46–52): Toward Decentering Ableist Readings\",\"authors\":\"JP O’Connor\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15685152-20231721\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract It is commonly acknowledged that blindness and seeing play an important role in the theology of the Gospel of Mark. Typically, readers interpret “spiritual blindness” as the moral thrust of the discipleship discourse in Mark 8:22–10:52. While the disciples fail to see their teacher as the Christ, blind Bartimaeus appears to identify Jesus as the “Son of David” (10:46–52). However, centering blindness-as-vice not only plays on an unfortunate ableist binary but also renders Mark’s more marginal characters as insignificant. Research on blindness in antiquity demonstrates how socioeconomic status was a leading factor in determining social perceptions of the blind. This article contends that Mark’s Bartimaeus pericope should be read accordingly. Instead of serving as a metaphor for “spiritual blindness,” physically blind characters are raised to the status of insider as a condemnation of mistreatment of the poor—a motif found within the broader terrain of Mark’s moral landscape (6:30–44; 8:1–10; 12:38–44; 14:1–11).\",\"PeriodicalId\":43103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biblical Interpretation-A Journal of Contemporary Approaches\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biblical Interpretation-A Journal of Contemporary Approaches\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685152-20231721\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biblical Interpretation-A Journal of Contemporary Approaches","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685152-20231721","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:人们普遍认为,在马可福音的神学中,失明和看见扮演着重要的角色。通常,读者会将“属灵的盲目”解释为马可福音8:22-10:52中门徒话语的道德主旨。当门徒们没有看到他们的老师是基督时,瞎子巴底买似乎认为耶稣是“大卫的子孙”(10:46-52)。然而,将失明作为罪恶的中心不仅发挥了不幸的残疾主义者的二元性,而且使马克的边缘角色变得微不足道。对古代失明的研究表明,社会经济地位是决定社会对盲人看法的主要因素。本文认为马可的《巴底买书》应据此阅读。而不是作为“精神失明”的隐喻,身体失明的人物被提升到局内人的地位,作为对虐待穷人的谴责——这是在马可的道德景观的更广阔的领域中发现的主题(6:30-44;8:1-10;12:38-44;14:1-11)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘Spiritual Blindness’ in the Bartimaeus Pericope (Mark 10:46–52): Toward Decentering Ableist Readings
Abstract It is commonly acknowledged that blindness and seeing play an important role in the theology of the Gospel of Mark. Typically, readers interpret “spiritual blindness” as the moral thrust of the discipleship discourse in Mark 8:22–10:52. While the disciples fail to see their teacher as the Christ, blind Bartimaeus appears to identify Jesus as the “Son of David” (10:46–52). However, centering blindness-as-vice not only plays on an unfortunate ableist binary but also renders Mark’s more marginal characters as insignificant. Research on blindness in antiquity demonstrates how socioeconomic status was a leading factor in determining social perceptions of the blind. This article contends that Mark’s Bartimaeus pericope should be read accordingly. Instead of serving as a metaphor for “spiritual blindness,” physically blind characters are raised to the status of insider as a condemnation of mistreatment of the poor—a motif found within the broader terrain of Mark’s moral landscape (6:30–44; 8:1–10; 12:38–44; 14:1–11).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: This innovative and highly acclaimed journal publishes articles on various aspects of critical biblical scholarship in a complex global context. The journal provides a medium for the development and exercise of a whole range of current interpretive trajectories, as well as deliberation and appraisal of methodological foci and resources. Alongside individual essays on various subjects submitted by authors, the journal welcomes proposals for special issues that focus on particular emergent themes and analytical trends. Over the past two decades, Biblical Interpretation has provided a professional forum for pushing the disciplinary boundaries of biblical studies: not only in terms of what biblical texts mean, but also what questions to ask of biblical texts, as well as what resources to use in reading biblical literature. The journal has thus the distinction of serving as a site for theoretical reflection and methodological experimentation.
期刊最新文献
Hidden in Plain Sight: Saul’s Male Trauma Narrative in 1 Samuel Thirteen Ways of Looking at Elijah’s Blackbirds ‘It is Not Good for the Human to be Alone…’ (Gen. 2:18): yhwh Elohim Among the Weeping Gods of the Ancient Near East Ambiguous Prayers in 1 Timothy 2:1–2: A Postcolonial Reading Announcing the Biblical Interpretation Reading List
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1