Let's give the question some focus. This question is not merely theoretical but affects the interpretation of some verses. For example:
Matt 15:29 wrote:Καὶ μεταβὰς ἐκεῖθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἦλθεν παρὰ τὴν θάλλασσαν τῆς Γαλιλαίας, καὶ ἀναβὰς εἰς τὸ ὄρος ἐκάθητο ἐκεῖ.
On the one hand, if ἦλθεν is telic, then the bolded phrase would mean "he came to [the shore] by the sea of Galilee" (so NJB, KJV, BDAG παρά C1bβ p.757 col. 2). On the other hand, if ἦλθεν is not telic, then it would mean "he went along the sea of Galilee" (so NRSV, NASB, NIV, NAB, NET, ESV, RSV).
Which interpretation is to be preferred?
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D. (Duke)
Post-Doctoral Fellow, Faculty of Theology, Uppsala