[B-Greek] Eph 4:22-24

Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Mon Jun 27 13:28:28 EDT 2005


On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:41 AM, David Bielby wrote:

> Vs 22   APOQESQAI UMAS KATA THN PROTERAN....
>
> Vs 23   ANANEOUSQAI DE TWi PNEUMATI TOU NOOS hUMWN
>
> Vs 24   KAI ENDUSASQAI TON KAINON ANQRWPON TON...
>
>
>
> My question is on the verbs here.  Should the two Aorist's be  
> handled as
> past tense or as
>
> imperatives.  Why?
>
>
>
> Having put off.or as imperatives.Put off.?  What impact does the  
> ANANEOUSQAI
>
> have on these Aorists?

Properly speaking, the aorist is a past tense only in the indicative,  
and the only place that an aorist infinitive can function to  
represent an indicative past tense  is in indirect discourse. There's  
no way that these infinitives are functioning as the verbs of an  
indirect-discourse construction: these infinitives represent actions  
TO BE performed, NOT actions that HAVE been performed. These forms  
are infinitives, but nevertheless they may have the semantic FORCE of  
imperatives in this context -- or else, as expressions of the nature  
of "learning Christ", i.e. "putting away one's former nature, getting  
renewed, putting on the new person ..."

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at ioa.com or cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/




More information about the B-Greek mailing list