From: Tom Launder (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Feb 09 1997 - 03:38:47 EST
I was challenged recently to study whether or not a believer has two
natures of one. Is a believer simultaneously old man and new or has the
old man died and now the believer is new only. The text which can
answer this question is Eph 4:22-24 and the three infinitives.
. . . EDIDAXQhTE. . . APOQESQAI (aorist inf)
ANAEOUSQAI (present inf)
ENDUSASQAI (aorist inf)
Imperatives or indicatives? This is the question!
The shift in tense appears to be very important here. If these were
commands wouldn't it be assumed that all should be present tense? If
the believer is being commanded to put off and put on, why aorist tense?
Doesn't the aorist point to an undefined action, but other places Paul
wants put off and on to be continuous activity?
A close parallel passage in Colossians 3:9-10 states,
APEKDUSAMENOI TON PALAION ANQRWPON. . .
ENDUSAMENOI TON NEON. . .
Here both appear as aorists and seem to point to an action in the past.
They are used as the basis for moral behavior (Do not lie to one
Romans 6:6 has,
TOUTO GINWSKONTES OTI O PALAIOS hMWN ANQRWPOS SUNESTAUPWQh. . .
Again the old man is crucified in an aorist event.
These Scriptures seem to portray the old man as a put off and crucified
entity. But the key text is Eph 4:22-24. If that passage is imperative
than the old man still lives though dead and must be put off. If not
then the old man is dead and believers are new only and put off sinful
deeds not the old man.
Is there anything I might be missing here?
Thanks for the help,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:05 EDT