The Proleptic Aorist revisited

Harry W. Jones hjbluebird at aol.com
Sat Jun 1 13:32:31 EDT 2002


Dear Mark(Wilson),

I've been thinking about the theory of the Deictic center but I
don't see how a Deictic center could be proven without showing 
the it is not in the same time slot as a present tense in the
same passage. I don't believe I've seen any evidence that shows
the Deictic as occupying such a different time slot. I hope you 
understand what I'm getting at Mark.

If you remember, I was asking about the time sequecing of NT
Greek verbs in a past post and Carl told me that they don't sequence. This
would mean that the time sequence of the actions of a passage would have
to come from the context, I would think.

Best Regards,
Harry Jones


> I would like to comment on the temporal nature of
> the Aorist tense as it relates to the Proleptic (Futuristic) Aorist.
> 
> 
> Wallace cites the following passages as the Aorist referencing future time.
> Granted it is not a common occurrence, but I wanted to see for myself
> if perhaps these Aorists were indeed past tense, not future as Wallace
> suggests. So please hold me in check as I attempt to follow a prescribed
> procedure in this hunch. I will ask the following questions:
> 
> 1. What is the Deictic Center (DC)?
> 2. What is the relationship of the Aorist verb to the DC?
> 
> Before I begin, I will state that it appears there is more flexibility in
> determining a DC then might be expected. I suspect that objections to
> my approach will focus on what I claim to be a "possible" DC in each
> passage.
> 
> 
> Here are Wallace’s citations:
> 
> Mark 11:24
> 
> PANTA hOSA PROSEUCESQE KAI AITEISQE
> PISTEUETE hOTI ELABETE KAI ESTAI hUMIN
> 
> Possible DC: the moment when you are actually praying
> 
> Why the Aorist: we are urged to have a certain attitude PRIOR TO
> the DC. We are to believe that we have already received what we
> are asking for. Perhaps this is a command to possess faith BEFORE
> we kneel down to pray.
> 
> Note: this verse does not say or imply that we ACTUALLY WILL
> receive what we pray for. It only admonishes us to pray with a certain
> attitiude.
> 
> 
> John 13:31
> 
> LEGEI IHSOUS NUN EDOXASQH hO hUIOS TOU ANQRWPOU
> KAI hO QEOS EDOXASQH EN AUTWi
> 
> 
> Possible DC: Judas’ exit from the room.
> 
> Hence, whatever happened,
> the act of identifying Judas as the betrayer resulted in his being 
> glorified.
> In essence, Jesus had sealed his own death by setting into motion the
> unalterable events once Judas left.
> (I am therefore suggesting that this has nothing to do with Christ’s 
> receiving
> his manifested glory. Note that God was glorified also. But God was
> already in a state of glorification. Hence, this must refer to some glory
> other than the glory God has.)
> 
> 
> Rom. 8:30
> 
> hOUS DE EDIKAIWSEN TOUTOUS KAI EDOXASEN
> 
> Possible DC: the time when God predestined those to be conformed
> to the image of Christ. I think Wallace’s explanation for this use
> of the Aorist is "it’s as good as done" may very well be a viable use
> of a past tense verb, as indeed could be the case in Mark 11 above.
> 
> Could the possible DC be WHEN WE ARE CONFORMED? That is, at
> the moment we become completely conformed to his son, we will have
> already been glorified. Glorification then being the last phase BEFORE our
> being fully conformed.
> 
> Rev. 10:7
> 
> hOTAN MELLHi SALPIZEIN KAI ETELESQH TO MUSTHRION TOU QEOU
> 
> I’ve mentioned this before. The DC is the time of the sound. So that, PRIOR
> TO
> the sound of the trumpet, the mystery has run its course. The sound of this
> trumpet
> would perhaps be the first event AFTER the mystery of God ends.
> 
> 
> Finally, Rolf posed this verse: Jude 14
> 
> Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied also regarding
> them, when he said: "Look the Lord will come (AORIST) with his holy
> myriads".
> 
> Possible DC: the next verse: to execute judgment upon all
> 
> PRIOR TO this judgment, the Lord returns. (This is clearly
> one place where I am suggesting that a DC can be quite flexible.
> In fact, perhaps the Aorist itself signals what DC the author
> wants to emphasize???)
> 
> 
> I really do not think that the above way of understanding the
> Aorist is any less likely than the Aorist essentially acting
> as a Future tense verb, which is the way I understand Wallace.
> 
> My thoughts,
> 
> Mark Wilson
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com



More information about the B-Greek mailing list