Re: Aspect in Mat. 16:19

rod.j.decker@uwrf.edu (Rodney Decker) wrote quoting Porter:

>"Whatever you might bind upon the earth (if such a binding event 
>were to occur), this is projected as being in a state of boundness 
>in heaven; and whatever you might loose upon the earth shall be in 
>a state of loosedness in heaven."
>He concludes that "the sense of heaven ratifying earth's 
>decision... seems fairly clearly established."

     So, if I've understood correctly, he takes the two perfect participles
as indicating a (state of) lasting effect from the action mentioned in the
protases of the conditional clauses.  

     Some other instances in the NT where the perfect is problematic in about
this same way are Mat. 18:18 and John 20:23.  D. A. Carson, in his commentary
on Matthew discusses these constructions in some detail, and gives
bibliography (Carson, _Matthew_ [EBC], [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984], pp.
370-72).  Raymond Brown, in his commentary on John (20:23 ad loc.), cites
some additional pertinent literature.  

     To take these as perfects of enduring effect seems alright to me.  Some
commentators have shied away from anything short of a full-blown future
perfect sense (i.e. "shall have been bound," etc.) in order to avoid the idea
of sacerdotalism.  But it appears that Jesus' strong rebuke of Peter when he
tried to bind those forces that would take Jesus to the cross (vv. 21-23)
provides a caveat about the authority Jesus conferred in Mat. 16:17-19 which
should be able to allay such concerns.

David L. Moore