Matt 24:45 κατέστησεν vs Luke 12:42 καταστήσει

Post Reply
Scott Lawson
Posts: 361
Joined: June 9th, 2011, 6:36 pm

Matt 24:45 κατέστησεν vs Luke 12:42 καταστήσει

Post by Scott Lawson » August 30th, 2015, 2:07 pm

Why do we have the aorist form of the verb for "appoint" (κατέστησεν) in Matthew's account of "the slave" (Matt 24:45) and the future tense of "appoint" (καταστήσει) in Luke's account (Luke 12:42) when the slave is initially appointed? Is the aorist expressing remoteness? Is it being used to express a future event?

In the next part of the account when the master returns and sees the faithful work of the good slave and rewards him with greater responsibility the future tense of "appoint" (καταστήσει) is used in both accounts.
0 x


Scott Lawson

Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Re: Matt 24:45 κατέστησεν vs Luke 12:42 καταστήσει

Post by Stephen Hughes » September 23rd, 2015, 5:29 am

I think that it could be taken as either a gnomic aorist or an aorist expressing a vivid future.

In a timeless context, a gnomic aorist expresses something that hold true for all time. That could express the type of steward that masters always choose, and then he will do it.

In a future context, it could refer to a vivid future. A verse often quoted in support of that is this quote from Euripides
Εὐρ. Ἀλκ. 386 wrote:Ἄδμητος:
ἀπωλόμην ἄρ᾽, εἴ με δὴ λείψεις, γύναι.
I think it could be read as a small maxim (gnomic) within a wider story, or as another verb of future reference in the context of a story all with future reference.

Both gnomic and vivid future are aorists indicative that don't refer to past time.
0 x
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)

Scott Lawson
Posts: 361
Joined: June 9th, 2011, 6:36 pm

Re: Matt 24:45 κατέστησεν vs Luke 12:42 καταστήσει

Post by Scott Lawson » September 23rd, 2015, 1:06 pm

Thanks so much Stephen!
0 x
Scott Lawson

Post Reply