Aorist of epistle in 1 Cor 5 ?

Martin Arhelger (martin.arhelger@metronet.de)
Thu, 6 Nov 1997 18:41:42 +0100

It is generally known, that a Greek writer, when writing in a letter
(epistle)
concerning his own acts, can use aorist, where we would expect
present tense or future tense, look at BDF, paragraph 334.
(This aorist is generally accepted in Philm 12, Acts 23:30 ...
and there are many examples in the non-biblical papyri.)

Now I considered the aorist form EGRAPSA in 1 Cor 5:9 and 5:11.
BDF denies these cases to be aorists of an epistle.
But I don't see reasons for that. But I see reasons against it:

1) The NUN in 1 Cor 5:11 points to the present tense. NUN is often
set
in contrast to the past (1 Cor 3:2) or the future (1 Cor 16:12).

2) The theory of a former letter of Paul to Corinth is nowhere
else required in 1 Corinthians. (Compare with 2nd Corinthians,
where there are several allusions to the first epistle.)

3) The aorist of an epistle is habitual in Paul's letters
and in letters of that period.

Any comments?

______________________________
| |
| Martin Arhelger |
| D-53121 Bonn |
| Germany |
| martin.arhelger@metronet.de |
|______________________________|