Re: Jn 7:28, 30; ELHLUQA ... ELHLUQEI

From: Paul S. Dixon (
Date: Fri May 01 1998 - 13:53:59 EDT

On Fri, 01 May 1998 10:28:54 -0700 writes:
>Paul S. Dixon wrote:
>> B-Greekers:
>> Why is ELHLUQEI in Jn 7:30 pluperfect and not perfect, as is ELHLUQA
>> 7:28? Is this just a case where the perfect and pluperfect forms
>> be identical (if they were in the same person), but where the tenses
>> contextually derived (hOTI OUPW ELHLUQEI hH hWRA AUTOU)?
>The tenses would seem to indicate relative [linear] time, and if the
>ELHLUQEI were to follow HN, it would have had to have been in the
>perfect ELHLUQA.
> Simply put in English, 'His time had not yet arrived.' Which is
>different from 'did not yet arrive', eh?
> See John 3:24 for the pluperfect force of the perfect following HN,
>where the force, [but not the translation!] is 'For John had not yet
>been imprisoned.' [And NOT 'has not yet been'!]

Huh? Perhaps my question was not clear, or you mis-interpreted it,
or both. I was asking about the apparently identical forms being used,
i.e., the perfect and pluperfect forms here which, had they been in the
same person, would have been identical. If so, then my question is,
is this a case where the tense is determined, not from the form, but
from the context?

Paul Dixon

You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:39:38 EDT