I've been looking closely at 1 John 1:1-3 lately in preparation for teaching an exegesis class. When I took first-year Greek, my prof emphasized the presence and significance of verbs in the perfect mood, such as in 1:1, (O AKHKOAMEN. To take the perfect tense seriously as depicting an event in the past that has significance into the present, this verb might suggest something like, that which we have heard and still rings in our ears." That aside, and noting that I am not the first person by any means to notice the interesting grammatical features of these verses, it occurred to me while looking at them that, rather than distinguishing between the events or perspective on events of the perfect tense verbs vs. the aorist tense verbs, that maybe John only used variation in tense for variety but saw both tenses as having the same significance. I have not seen any commentator suggest that and in fact, they seem to suggest otherwise, but I wonder if all the verbs have, say, a perfective aspect. Any thoughts?
Ken Litwak
Azusa Pacific University
Can the Perfect and the Aorist be synonymous at times?
Can the Perfect and the Aorist be synonymous at times?
Kenneth D. Litwak, Ph.D.
Reference and Instruction Librarian
Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary
Mill Valley, CA 94941
kennethlitwak@ggbts.edu
Adjunct Professor of New Testament in ExL
Asbury Theological Seminary
Wilmore, KY
Reference and Instruction Librarian
Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary
Mill Valley, CA 94941
kennethlitwak@ggbts.edu
Adjunct Professor of New Testament in ExL
Asbury Theological Seminary
Wilmore, KY
-
- Posts: 3351
- Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Contact:
Re: Can the Perfect and the Aorist be synonymous at times?
We had a discussion about the perfects in 1 John 1:1 recently here: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/vie ... =46&t=1704
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Melbourne, Australia