From: Dale M. Wheeler (
Date: Thu Feb 29 1996 - 15:05:28 EST

>In my rapid survey of the two lists (I didn't even look at your third
>paragraph until I'd checked the rfcs), I would deem every single instance
>an aorist, some of them in terms of the parallel verb in the aorist, others
>because they are quite clearly in secondary sequence, but all of them, and
>especially the three most questionable ones--those from the Parable of the
>Wicked Husbandmen--because the aorist clearly yields the more appropriate
>aspect in the context.

I agree...but you don't see any formal reason that they couldn't be parsed,
in the abstract, as Present Subj, do you ??

Dale M. Wheeler, Th.D.
Chair, Biblical Languages Dept Multnomah Bible College
8435 NE Glisan Street Portland, OR 97220
Voice: 503-251-6416 FAX:503-254-1268 E-Mail:

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:38 EDT