» Site Navigation | | | » Online Users: 64 | | 17 members and 47 guests | | Beoga, Bookmeister, Chippy, christabella_warren, ChristianTrader, Christoffer, Glenn Ferrell, Hamalas, matthew11v25, Michael Turner, Pergamum, Pilgrim72, Simply_Nikki, Southern Presbyterian, T.A.G. | | Most users ever online was 856, 07-06-2007 at 12:19 AM. | |  | 
06-30-2009, 06:13 PM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Wrightwood, CA
Posts: 8,606
Thanks: 3,597
Thanked 1,318 Times in 758 Posts
| | | Perfect Tense in Luke 5:20
I went back and reviewed Mounce concerning the perfect passive indicative of aphiemi in Luke 5:20, "Thy sins are forgiven thee." I am by no means a Greek expert but it seems to me that the use of the perfect, as opposed to the aorist in Rom 4:7 for example, teaches that the man's sins were forgiven and he continues in a state of forgiveness. This means that even if the man sins again in the future, he continues in that state of forgiveness.
Is this good exegesis or am I overstating my case?
| 
06-30-2009, 06:38 PM
|  | Puritanboard Senior | | Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Tchula, MS
Posts: 2,571
Thanks: 136
Thanked 560 Times in 259 Posts
| |
Aorist is like a one time in the past thing. Perfect is in many cases something that happened in the past with ongoing effects (affects?).
Does that help. I think you are right or at least on the right track.
| 
06-30-2009, 07:07 PM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Oreland, PA.
Posts: 47
Thanks: 9
Thanked 16 Times in 11 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by KMK I went back and reviewed Mounce concerning the perfect passive indicative of aphiemi in Luke 5:20, "Thy sins are forgiven thee." I am by no means a Greek expert but it seems to me that the use of the perfect, as opposed to the aorist in Rom 4:7 for example, teaches that the man's sins were forgiven and he continues in a state of forgiveness. This means that even if the man sins again in the future, he continues in that state of forgiveness.
Is this good exegesis or am I overstating my case? | It appears that your exegesis is sound. The perfect tense indicates completed action with abiding results.
In any case, here's a note from Hendriksen & Kistemaker on your verse. Quote:
In verses 20 and 23 note ἀφέωνται, third per. pl. Doric perfect passive indicat. of ἀφίημι, here in the sense of forgive, where the parallels in Matthew (9:2, 5) and Mark (2:5, 9) use the present passive. But whether one says “are forgiven” or “have been and remain forgiven,” the result is the same: the man’s sins are no longer reckoned against him. They “are forgiven.” In verse 21 the aor. infinitive ἀφεῖναι stresses the fact of forgiveness as such, apart from any time reference. By contrast, the pres. active infinitive ἀφιέναι in verse 24 has reference to the continuing forgiving activity of the Son of man.
Hendriksen, William ; Kistemaker, Simon J.: New Testament Commentary : Exposition of the Gospel According to Luke. Grand Rapids : Baker Book House, 1953-2001 (New Testament Commentary 11), S. 301
| | | The Following User Says Thank You to Nomad For This Useful Post: | | 
06-30-2009, 07:33 PM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Wrightwood, CA
Posts: 8,606
Thanks: 3,597
Thanked 1,318 Times in 758 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomad Quote:
Originally Posted by KMK I went back and reviewed Mounce concerning the perfect passive indicative of aphiemi in Luke 5:20, "Thy sins are forgiven thee." I am by no means a Greek expert but it seems to me that the use of the perfect, as opposed to the aorist in Rom 4:7 for example, teaches that the man's sins were forgiven and he continues in a state of forgiveness. This means that even if the man sins again in the future, he continues in that state of forgiveness.
Is this good exegesis or am I overstating my case? | It appears that your exegesis is sound. The perfect tense indicates completed action with abiding results.
In any case, here's a note from Hendriksen & Kistemaker on your verse. Quote:
In verses 20 and 23 note ἀφέωνται, third per. pl. Doric perfect passive indicat. of ἀφίημι, here in the sense of forgive, where the parallels in Matthew (9:2, 5) and Mark (2:5, 9) use the present passive. But whether one says “are forgiven” or “have been and remain forgiven,” the result is the same: the man’s sins are no longer reckoned against him. They “are forgiven.” In verse 21 the aor. infinitive ἀφεῖναι stresses the fact of forgiveness as such, apart from any time reference. By contrast, the pres. active infinitive ἀφιέναι in verse 24 has reference to the continuing forgiving activity of the Son of man.
Hendriksen, William ; Kistemaker, Simon J.: New Testament Commentary : Exposition of the Gospel According to Luke. Grand Rapids : Baker Book House, 1953-2001 (New Testament Commentary 11), S. 301
| | It seems, then, that the perfect indicative of verse 20, and the present infinitive of verse 24, combine to strengthen the case that even the man's future sins shall continue to be forgiven. IOW, he is in a state of forgiveness.
| 
06-30-2009, 07:35 PM
|  | Arbitrary Moderation | | Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Flint, MI
Posts: 2,908
Thanks: 824
Thanked 1,699 Times in 743 Posts
| | |
Ken, I think that may be pressing the perfect a bit too hard if we're speaking strictly grammatically. Consider the following parallel: The doctor says to his patient, "Arise and go home, son; all your wounds have been dressed and healed."
__________________
Paul Korte
OPC
Flint, MI They who perceive in themselves discoveries of the divine goodness, so full and absolutely perfect, and who make them the subject of earnest meditation, will never embrace new doctrines, by which the very grace they feel so powerfully in themselves is thrown into the shade. --John Calvin
Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? | | The Following User Says Thank You to Prufrock For This Useful Post: | | 
06-30-2009, 09:24 PM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Wrightwood, CA
Posts: 8,606
Thanks: 3,597
Thanked 1,318 Times in 758 Posts
| | |
Mounce says of Luke 5:20, "The emphasis is on the resulting state of the action (intensive)... Greek For The Rest Of Us; pg 163.
What would be the difference if it (aphiemi) was in the aorist tense? (As it is Rom 4:7)
| 
06-30-2009, 10:16 PM
|  | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 796
Thanks: 91
Thanked 496 Times in 255 Posts
| | |
No, the exegesis is not sound. The perfect tense does not convey any information about whether the current state will or will not continue, or under what conditions the state will continue. I should also mention that contemporary verbal aspect theory is calling into question the traditional account of the perfect, but that I still prefer the traditional understanding.
From Burton's Moods and Tenses:
74. The Perfect of Completed Action. In its most frequent use the Perfect Indicative represents an action as standing at the time of speaking complete. The reference of the tense is thus double; it implies a past action and affirms an existing result.
75. The Perfect of Existing State. The Perfect is sometimes used when the attention is directed wholly to the present resulting state, the past action of which it is the result being left out of thought. This usage occurs most frequently in a few verbs which use the Perfect in this sense only.
76. There is no sharp line of distinction between the Perfect of Completed Action and the Perfect of Existing State. To the latter head are to be assigned those instances in which the past act is practically dropped from thought, and the attention turned wholly to the existing result; while under the former head are to be placed those instances in which it is evident that the writer had in mind both the past act and the present result.
80. The Aoristic Perfect. The Perfect Indicative is sometimes used in the New Testament of a simple past fact where it is scarcely possible to suppose that the thought of existing result was in the writer's mind.
__________________
Charlie Johnson
Downtown Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, student
| | The Following User Says Thank You to CharlieJ For This Useful Post: | | 
07-01-2009, 07:56 AM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Oreland, PA.
Posts: 47
Thanks: 9
Thanked 16 Times in 11 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieJ The perfect tense does not convey any information about whether the current state will or will not continue, or under what conditions the state will continue. | You're absolutely right, and if grammar were all we had to work with, then I would agree that the perfect tense in Luke 5:20 wouldn't tell us if the man's situation would last. But, the fact that it was Christ Himself who forgave the man in Luke 5 should be a pretty good indication that his salvation was permanent. If we consider the context as well as the grammar we have sound exegesis.
| | The Following User Says Thank You to Nomad For This Useful Post: | | 
07-01-2009, 08:14 AM
|  | Puritanboard Senior | | Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: North Texas
Posts: 2,187
Thanks: 700
Thanked 818 Times in 448 Posts
| | |
The perfect tense does not address the future. As Charlie noted, "it implies a past action and affirms an existing result." Grammatically, it does NOT imply a perpetual condition.
__________________
Jim
1689 LBCF
Independent Bible Church
North Texas, USA
Last edited by Jimmy the Greek; 07-01-2009 at 09:23 AM.
Reason: edited for needed correction noted by KMK
| 
07-01-2009, 09:07 AM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Wrightwood, CA
Posts: 8,606
Thanks: 3,597
Thanked 1,318 Times in 758 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Gomarus The perfect tense does not address the future. As Charlie noted, "it implies a past action and affirms an existing result." Grammatically, it does imply a perpetual condition. | Did you mean to write, "Grammatically, it does NOT imply a perpetual condition?"
| | The Following User Says Thank You to KMK For This Useful Post: | | 
07-01-2009, 09:23 AM
|  | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 796
Thanks: 91
Thanked 496 Times in 255 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomad You're absolutely right, and if grammar were all we had to work with, then I would agree that the perfect tense in Luke 5:20 wouldn't tell us if the man's situation would last. But, the fact that it was Christ Himself who forgave the man in Luke 5 should be a pretty good indication that his salvation was permanent. If we consider the context as well as the grammar we have sound exegesis. | The point of the question, though, was not whether the man's sins would stay forgiven. I hardly think there is any doubt about that. The question was whether the perfect tense necessarily leads to that conclusion.
There is a difference between one's conclusion, and one's exegesis (process of "drawing out" the text). Both need to be correct, or one distorts Scripture. KMK's question was a good one, since the tense system is usually one of the hardest aspects of a language to learn. It's very easy to press a nuance that isn't there or vice versa. Charles Ryrie, for example, is notorious for his erroneous "once-for-all" aorist.
| | The Following User Says Thank You to CharlieJ For This Useful Post: | | 
07-01-2009, 09:38 AM
|  | Moderator | | Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Wrightwood, CA
Posts: 8,606
Thanks: 3,597
Thanked 1,318 Times in 758 Posts
| | |
Charlie makes a very good point!
One last question: When Jesus uses the perfect of 'grapho' in Luke 4:4 and 4:8, Machen says, "The meaning is 'it stands written'." Since it was written in the past and it stands written today, is there no implication (in the verb alone) that it shall remain written?
| 
07-01-2009, 10:57 AM
|  | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Greenville, SC
Posts: 796
Thanks: 91
Thanked 496 Times in 255 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by KMK Charlie makes a very good point!
One last question: When Jesus uses the perfect of 'grapho' in Luke 4:4 and 4:8, Machen says, "The meaning is 'it stands written'." Since it was written in the past and it stands written today, is there no implication (in the verb alone) that it shall remain written? | I don't think that can legitimately be inferred from the verb tense alone. The perfect of γραφω is used often in secular literature, often in a speech to introduce an authoritative quote or to quote a standing law. The NT writers seem to follow this, since almost every instance of the perfect is an OT quote. That certainly seems to indicate that the speaker views the source (or at least that portion) as a standing authority. So, taken in context, I think that Jesus' use proves that he viewed the law as a continually abiding authority.
However, I would not invest the tense itself with that full meaning, since when Demosthenes argues from the law using the perfect, it is doubtful that he views each and every statute he cites as eternally abiding, only presently in effect. Also, if we were to invest the perfect with that kind of power, I think we'd get in trouble on those fewer occasions where the aorist is chosen. Would that mean the NT writer views it as significant to the past only?
There is definitely a weaker use, one might even say a more normal use, of the perfect in the secular literature. It has no notion of authority, simply testifying to a past event. It is fairly interchangeable with the aorist. If I say something today, tomorrow I can either say "I said" or "I have said." Both mean approximately the same thing, although the second could imply that I still mean it.
So, in conclusion, the perfect tense of γραφω can have a special meaning involving the use of authority that is specific to that verb alone, not generic to the tense.
| | The Following User Says Thank You to CharlieJ For This Useful Post: | | 
07-01-2009, 11:16 AM
|  | Vanilla Westminsterian | | Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 10,519
Thanks: 334
Thanked 3,501 Times in 1,412 Posts
| | |
The perfect tense is not a perpetual state. After all, one could be "freed" (perf. tense) and then be enslaved again later.
The real emphasis of the perfect is on the current state that ensues from the past action. So the aorist of "forgiven" would emphasize the act of forgiveness in the past, and the perfect tense would emphasize the state of forgiveness due to the past act.
Not such that we would be dogmatic about the differences, but I believe that the traditional view of tenses has far more to support it than the new view advanced by Mounce.
__________________ Fred Greco
Senior Pastor, Christ Church PCA (Katy, TX) Christ Church Blog "The heart is the main thing in true religion...It is the hinge and turning-point in the condition of man's soul. If the heart is alive to God and quickened by the Spirit, the man is a living Christian. If the heart is dead and has not the Spirit, the man is dead before God." (J.C. Ryle) | | The Following User Says Thank You to fredtgreco For This Useful Post: | |  | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | |