[B-Greek] question about Matthew 17:5
George F Somsel
gfsomsel at juno.com
Thu Feb 3 08:48:47 EST 2005
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 07:48:47 EST MPAymerNYC at aol.com writes:
In a message dated 2/3/2005 2:51:14 AM Eastern Standard Time,
gfsomsel at juno.com writes:
Are you saying that you think it is saying "I was pleased with him (but I
no longer am)"? It
That is precisely the question--and the question is only theological
insofar as I will be using the text to teach seminarians.
I do not believe I'm trying to engage in a theology of tenses. I'm trying
to understand how a generally past and punctiliar tense functions in this
particular sentence (and in its parallels in the Synoptics: the other
transfiguration narratives, the baptismal narratives, and the quote of
the same in 2 Peter).
I have, and have read, Wallace's book and am not particularly convinced
by his arguments--which is why I posed the question in the first place.
The question is one of "are" versus "were"--and I have just not run into
many aorists that are translated with a present--that is linear--
meaning. In fact, in all of the examples that have been proffered--by you
OR by Wallace, the text may be translated in the past/punctiliar sense
without detracting from what appears to be the intent of the redactor.
So either the intent of the synoptic redactors was the strangely
past/punctiliar "In whom I delighted; in whom I was content; in whom I
was well-pleased" --in which case the command that follows "akouete
autou" seems to makes little sense (I was pleased in him; I may or may
not be pleased any longer; but listen to him anyway); or else the case
must be--contra to typical practice--taking on some kind of
linear/continuous meaning or, as I suspect, a more "perfect tense" kind
of meaning (past with implications on the present--thus in whom I have
been well pleased, content, etc.).
This latter would seem to fit Bailey/Vanderbroek's argument that the text
is a commissioning story (which I don't really buy) or at least the
commendatory nature of the text.
>From what I have read of Wallace, I have not seen exempla that could
either be translated in a present, linear fashion (the closest he gets is
"just now I was..."--which is still past-tense (and punctiliar)) or in a
perfect, implications on the present, fashion.
Re. tense, an examination of the narrative of the section is telling:
1) it is the ONLY time in the entire pericope when a speaker reverts to
the aorist tense (unless one argues for the aorist subjunctive in Peter's
use of poihsw--but that need not be aorist nor subjunctive--the simple
reading of FAI1s will work to establish meaning)
2) it is framed by two verbs in the PAI: estin (this is my son); and
akouete (listen to him)
Within such a context the aorist stands out rather starkly.
So, my question
1) could the aorist be being used in a
past-with-implications-for-the-present sense, and are there indisputable
exempla of the aorist functioning in this way in other texts?
2) Is this cultural--simply a turn of phrase or what was called at one
point a "Semiticism"? Certainly it has become a turn of phrase in the
early ekklhsia by the time of the Petrine corpus.
3) Is it a direct quote from the LXX in which eudokew IN THE AORIST must
be translated either in a present/linear fashion or in a
perfect/past-with-implications-on-the-present fashion?
4) Is there some other reasonable explanation? Remember, I OWN both the
Wallace and the Blass-Debrunner-Funk. I'm asking because I have already
consulted my resources to no avail and I have been fascinated by the
discussion on this list of Ioudaios--a discussion that impacted my review
of Philip Esler's newest commentary (Romans) due out in RBL in a few
months.
My suspicion is not that I'm engaging in a theology of the tenses but
rather than Wallace--through Zondervan, which is becoming increasingly
overly theological (note the Mounce text, which I will not use for my
students)--is attempting to defend a difficult text. I don't actually
care whether the text MUST be past-tense or not theologically--my
question is contextual, narratological, text-critical, structural (oh,
and there are theological implications for every biblical critical
move--did I mention that?).
Cheers,
M. Aymer
Rev. Margaret Aymer, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of New Testament
The Interdenominational Theological Center, Atlanta, GA
404-527-7731
___________
Actually, "just now I was..."--which is still past-tense (and
punctiliar)" is not correct. It is more nearly imperfect.
It is not simply Wallace who acknowledges that there are other uses of
the aorist than a punctiliar sense. C.F.D. Moule in his
_An_Idiom_Book_of_New_Testament_Greek_ refers to the view of Moulton
"Moulton conveniently distinguishes certain meanings within the general
scope of the Aorist. Particularly notable are what he terms (Proleg.
109) the Ingressive and (following German terminology) the Constative
respectively. The Ingressive (Burton, Inceptive, see esp. M.T. §§ 54,
55) Aorist represents, as he says, 'the point of entrance'. HN KAI
EZHSEN, perhaps came to life (cf. Rom xiv. 9, Rev. ii. 8 EGENETO NEKROS
KAI EZHSEN, and Rev. i. 18 EGENOMHN NEKROS KAI IDOU ZWN EIMI), John iv.
52 KOMYOTERON ESXEN, took a turn for the better, Acts vii. 60 EKOIMHQH,
fell asleep I Cor. iv. 8 EBASILEUSATE, you have become kings, II Cor.
viii. 9 EPTWXEUSEN, he became poor (in both of which cases the use of to
become sufficiently represents the ingressive idea, and in the former of
which English idiom demands a perfect). The Constative (or Summary)
Aorist is, as Moulton ingeniously says, like 'a line reduced to a point
by persepctive'; John ii. 20 TESSERAKONTA KAI hEC ETESIN OIKODOMHQH hO
NAOS hOUTOS, this temple took forty-six years to build (my example--but
it seems exactly of a class with Moulton's EPOIHSEN hO DEINA of a
craftsman's signature, i.e. this was made by so-and-so).
pp. 10, 11
Stop creating problems for yourself (let's see--isn't that supposed to be
an aorist?). :-)
george
gfsomsel
Therefore, O faithful Christian,
search for truth, hear truth,
learn truth, love truth,
speak the truth, hold the truth,
defend the truth till death.
- Jan Hus
___________
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list