[B-Greek] Fw: Aorist Subjunctive in 1 Jn 1:9

Alastair Haines haines at alastairs.com
Sun Apr 3 00:34:18 EDT 2011


> On Apr 2 Renwick Preston wrote:
> Aorist Subjunctive in 1 Jn 1:9
> Why is the word for forgive in this verse an aorist?
>
> From: Carl Conrad
> 1 John 1:9 ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν, πιστός ἐστιν καὶ δίκαιος,
> ἵνα ἀφῇ ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἀδικίας.
> [1John 1:9 EAN hOMOLOGWMEN TAS hAMARTIAS hHMWN,
> PISTOS ESTIN KAI DIKAIOS, hINA AFHi hHMIN TAS hAMARTIAS
> KAI KAQARISHi hHMAS APO PASHS ADIKIAS.]
>
> I would think it's because God's forgiveness is thought of as a single act 
> rather than as an ongoing one.
>
> From: Nikolaos Adamou
> It is the 3rd structure of a hypothetical case
> ἐὰν +  subjunctive , ἀόριστος (past)
> ἐὰν ὁμολογῶμεν - ἀφῇ + καθαρίσῃ
>
> it is used to indicate the something is repeated in the past and in the 
> future
> http://users.sch.gr/papangel/sch/anc/ph10.ipothetiki_logi.pdf

CC: "rather than as an ongoing one"
NA: "repeated in the past and in the future"

At the prompting of Professor Conrad, regarding the force of the aorist for 
exactly this same verb three times in Matthew 6, I checked some well-known 
authorities on the subject.

 Porter categorises many cases like these as OMNITEMPORAL, which is a broad 
class subsuming several traditional divisions. Fanning, on the other hand, 
in a discussion of gnomic aorists, refines traditional divisions into 
additional classes. For example, "the aorist of similies" (not relevant 
here), but also, "aorist for Semitic perfect" (following Black). Two classes 
of Semitic perfect typically translated by aorists in the LXX are gnomic 
perfects and stative perfects. Similar observations are made in technical 
commentaries on Matthew.

In the current verse, would Porter, Fanning, Black et al. line up behind CC 
"single act rather than ... ongoing" or NA "repeated in ... past and ... 
future"? Perhaps these authorities may support BOTH CC AND NA in 1 John and 
in Matthew. That is, the aorist could reflect John's (or Matthew's) first 
language Semitic usage. Whatever precise idiomatic usage obtains, however, 
the verb "to forgive" is being abstracted beyond a single TIME SITUATED 
event.

In so far as Professor Conrad and Nikolas Adamou refer to the same 
conception, I think the best literature supports them. That conception is 
something like: PRIMARILY the state of God forgiving the remorseful viewed 
as a TIMELESS UNITY, but with legitimate conotations of concrete 
instantiation of this general principle, without commitment to whether it is
regular, continuous, past, present or future.

I can supply various quotes from Porter, Fanning, Black and various 
commentaries if there is sufficient interest.

alastair 




More information about the B-Greek mailing list