[b-greek] Re: Perfect tense in 1 Cor 7:15

From: Paul S Dixon (dixonps@juno.com)
Date: Fri Dec 07 2001 - 17:00:18 EST



On Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:51:20 -0600 "Carl W. Conrad"
<cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu> writes:

> No, it does not say that (that would be something like OUDE
> DEDOULWTAI
> OUPOTE); what it says is "the non-believer is not in a state of
> bonded
> obligation." or "the non-believer does not stand obligated." The
> perfect
> tense form is not concerned at all with past action (that would get
> expressed with an aorist: EDOULWQH) but with the state currently
> holding.

Carl:

I think what you meant to say was, "the believer does not stand
obligated."

But, when you say the "perfect tense form is not concerned at all with
past action ... but with the state currently holding," don't you mean
that in this particular instance the stress is upon the state currently
holding, as per the intensive nuance of the perfect? If so, is it still
best to say the perfect tense (here) is not concerned at all with the
past action? Doesn't the perfect tense generally carry both the concept
of completed past action and the concept of continuing results to the
present, even though the nuances may vary from past to present?

The way you state it seems to be over-playing the present tense aspect of
the perfect, as though there may be no difference between the two tenses
here. It seems the OU + perfect tense communicates both a time past when
the believer was set free from the bonds, as well as the continuing and
resulting state to the present, even if the stress is intensive.

Paul Dixon

---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:14 EDT