Mark 10 from a Critical Point: Looking for something completely different, just found one of the first text-critical pieces I wrote sometimes in the last century 🙂 ::: The Interpreter’s Bible points out that the composition of the Gospel was based on oral tradition (Grant 634). Form Criticism characterizes the structure of Mark as episodic, where the different episodes in the plot of Mark are linked by words like, “immediately,” “again,” “and” (Anderson 7). Redaction Criticism, however, suggests that the style of writing is usual for Mark. Proof for this is the great number of various repetitions and stories, embedded within each other (Perkins 510-11). Mercer Commentary on the Bible points out that the literary criticism structures of inclusion and chaism are among the main forms of repetition in the Markan Gospel account, where the inclusion is “a frame defined by the starting phrase,” and the chaism is “even more extensive repetition” (Dowd 975). The New Interpreter’s Bible states that the structure of the Gospel is such that individual narratives cannot be treated apart form their proper place in the story (Grant 512).
Rick Wadholm Jr [07/10/2015 10:51 AM]
Apparently autocorrect does not like your use of chiasm or inclusio. ?
John Kissinger [07/10/2015 11:01 AM]
or the grammar skills of a BA level foreign student which has already been a point of discussion at large 🙂 The other side would be that auto-spell by google/droid is anti-text-criticism (hence KJV only) thou such point would be so much conspiracy-theoretical #CT William DeArteaga
John Kissinger [07/13/2015 5:50 AM]
Reviewing this post early today: Autocorrect is a form of textual criticism #titleOFtheLECTUREtoday