[B-Greek] Mt 6:15 AFHTE vs. AFIETE

Alastair Haines afhaines at tpg.com.au
Fri Mar 25 05:21:04 EDT 2011


Robertson seems fine to me,
not that I'd be inclined to disagree with him anyway.

It seems we agree that time is not part of the intention of the Greek,
maybe we disagree about whether it is the Mood (subjunctive) or
Aspect (aoristic) that communicates that intention.

Why can't *both* Mood *and* Aspect in Mt 6:15,
together with *both* conditional construction *and* context,
constrain viewing the protasis as a whole, from the outside,
as a general condition, not piecemeal, nor from the inside,
nor in a specific or once-off kind of way.

Those oppositions are generally accepted by the grammars,
in a wide diversity of contexts. They are helpful for
confirming interpretation in this verse, aren't they?

Which idea is in the Greek?
1. A forgives B sin X, so God forgives A sin Y
2. A forgives B sin X, so God forgives A all sins
3. A forgives all, so God forgives A some sin Y
4. A forgives all, so God forgives A all sins
5. A mostly forgives all, and God forgives A all sins

Aren't there many clues in the text pushing interpretation
towards the later interpretations? I'd propose it's
exactly those same clues that push towards (5) over (4).

I think the plurality of the objects of both verbs
is also part of the logic.
Perhaps that's an easier constraint on interpretation.

Maybe "gnomic aorist" is not the best term.
Perhaps the generality and maxim-like feel of the verses
arises from grammatical features other than the aorist.
But I'm not sure I want to abandon the term or connection yet.

In any case, I don't think a single instance of unforgiveness
satisfies the condition of the protasis in 6:15.
So Oun Kwon has the right idea and right questions.

alastair

  From: George F Somsel 

  Note what A.T. has to say regarding time in the subjunctive
  "(α) No Time Element in the Subjunctive and Optative. There is only relative time (future), and that is not due to the tense at all. The subjunctive is future in relation to the speaker, as is often true of the optative, though the optative standpoint is then more remote, a sort of future from the standpoint of the past."
  If Robertson is correct (and I am certain he is), it cannot be gnomic or specify time in any way.  

  From: Alastair Haines afhaines at tpg.com.au
  ... so we can forget time.

  Pulling back from imagining episodes where individuals forgive or fail to forgive, frees things up from reading Matthew as saying "forgive or be damned."


More information about the B-Greek mailing list