Is 'Go' a verb or a participle?

Theognome · #1 (**permalink**) 03-22-2009, 10:27 PM

In matthew 28:19, Christ tells His disciples to 'Go and make disciples.' If 'Go' is the verb, then the focus is upon traveling. If it is a participle instead, then making disciples is the focus of the sentence. Can a Greek scholar offer some light on this?

Theognome

**Prufrock** · #2 (**permalink**) 03-22-2009, 10:36 PM

"Go forth" is a participle; "instruct" is the main verb.

uberkermit · #3 (**permalink**) 03-22-2009, 10:40 PM

Many moons ago I was scratching my head over this passage, until I had it explained to me this way: If you have an aorist participle in front of an aorist imperative, the construct is to be considered as a double imperative.

Theognome · #4 (**permalink**) 03-22-2009, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prufrock

"Go forth" is a participle; "instruct" is the main verb.

Boy- that would make many (if not most) sermons on that passage seem out of whack. Thankye!

Theognome

**Prufrock** · #5 (**permalink**) 03-22-2009, 10:45 PM

It should be noted that just because something is a participle it does not follow that it must be subordinate in meaning to the finite verb.

In this specific instance, it is clear that they are commanded to "go forth" just as much as they are commanded to "make disciples."

Rangerus · #6 (**permalink**) 03-22-2009, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by uberkermit

Many moons ago I was scratching my head over this passage, until I had it explained to me this way: If you have an aorist participle in front of an aorist imperative, the construct is to be considered as a double imperative.

Maybe I should of not slept through 6th grade english class.

Theognome · #7 (**permalink**) 03-22-2009, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prufrock

It should be noted that just because something is a participle it does not follow that it must be subordinate in meaning to the finite verb.

In this specific instance, it is clear that they are commanded to "go forth" just as much as they are commanded to "make disciples."

Agreed. The challenge arises when the emphasis is on going, thus diminishing the instructing portion. The 'nomads for Christ' ideology doesn't seem to fit what is being taught.

Theognome

-----Added 3/22/2009 at 11:00:05 EST-----

Quote:

Originally Posted by uberkermit

Many moons ago I was scratching my head over this passage, until I had it explained to me this way: If you have an aorist participle in front of an aorist imperative, the construct is to be considered as a double imperative.

Does this not place the primary focus upon instructing then?

Theognome

***Contra_Mundum*** · #8 (**permalink**) 03-22-2009, 11:51 PM

Some grammarians explain the usage of "going" in this passage as attendant circumstance, that is to say, "As you go, make disciples...." The following participles likely function as means participles, that is to say, "...by baptizing them... [and] teaching them..."

**armourbearer** · #9 (**permalink**) 03-23-2009, 12:01 AM

"Going" does not indicate a nomadic existence, but that the commission to make disciples must be aggressively carried out. The message is to be taken to where the people are. The Christian church should not adopt, nor can it afford to adopt, the Jonah-like policy of expecting the "nations" to come to Israel.

CNJ · #10 (**permalink**) 03-23-2009, 05:54 AM

Go is an imperative command meaning you go. This Great Commission is at the end of Matthew and Mark. Then in Acts 1 we see that Jesus said the disciples were to start where they were--in Jerusalem before they went to the rest of the world.

Carol, Retired English Teacher

LawrenceU · #11 (**permalink**) 03-23-2009, 08:19 AM

Matthew is exactly correct. To often the participle construction in the original language has been used as a 'demotivator' when in fact it intensifies the activity of making disciples.