I would agree with you, without giving up the connection of the Bethsaida
healing to Bartimaeus, that the Bethsaida is also linked to the 7:31-37,
by means of the use of spittle.
> In view of the Parable of the Sower in Mk 4, the comment on
>those who have ears and hear not, those who have eyes and see not, comments
>that seem pointed at the disciples,
You don't even have to go back that far to Mk 4. Mk8:18 states the
same thing: OFQALMOUS ECONTES OU BLEPETE KAI WTA ECONTES OUK AKOUETE?
> it has seemed to me that ONE of the
>points Mark is suggesting in these stories of blind and deaf men healed is
>that there may ultimately be hope for these dubious disciples of his (and
>for us!), although it may take a miracle or two for that hope to be
>realized.
Yes, Mark is definitely making point about the disciples, and in fact
I would say that a major theme of Mark is true discipleship, especially
under persecution.
Now, as for a place which is not nicely written (from a grammatical
perspective), and one which has been bothering me, is Mk16:6
...: IDE hO TOPOS hOPOU EQHKAN AUTON.
We have IDE, singular, apparently spoken to three women (the imperative
in v7 is plural). Why is TOPOS nominative instead of accusative as the
direct object? I suppose that IDE could be use absolutely, with an
implicit ESTIN for the rest of the fragment: "See, [it is] the place
where they laid him." Nevertheless, this can't be a specimen of
good Greek.
Stephen Carlson
-- Stephen C. Carlson : Poetry speaks of aspirations, scarlson@mindspring.com : and songs chant the words. http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/ : -- Shujing 2.35