SYNTAX
OF THE
MOODS and
TENSES
IN NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
By
ERNEST DE
WITT
President of the
1923-25
THE
COPYRIGHT
1900
By ERNEST D. BURTON
All
Rights Reserved
Published in pamphlet form 1888
Second Edition September 1898
Third Edition June 1898
Second
Impression September 1900
Third Impression April 1903
Fourth Impression October 1906
Fifth Impression November 1909
Sixth Impression October 1912
Seventh Impression October 1916
Eighth Impression November 1923
Digitally prepared by Ted Hildebrandt 2004
Gordon College, 255 Grapevine Rd., Wenham, MA 01984
For any errors please
contact: thildebrandt@gordon.edu
Composed and Printed By
The
PREFACE TO THE SECOND
EDITION.
THE first edition of this work
appeared as a pamphlet in
1888.
In issuing this revised and enlarged edition, it seems
desirable
to state somewhat more fully than was done in the
former
preface the purpose which it is hoped the book will
serve.
Classified according to its intent, it belongs among the
aids
to the interpretation of the New Testament. It is de-
signed
to assist English-speaking students in the task of
translating
the Greek New Testament into English forms of
hought
and expression. The work has not been undertaken
under
the impression that grammar is an end in itself, or that
a
knowledge of it is the sole qualification for successful in-
terpretation,
but in the conviction that grammar is one of
the
indispensable auxiliaries of interpretation. The book is
written,
therefore, in the interest not of historical but of
exegetical
grammar, not of philology as such, but of philology
as
an auxiliary of interpretation. If it has any value for
historical
grammar, this is incidental. Its main purpose is
to
contribute to the interpretation of the New Testament by
the
exposition of the functions of the verb in New Testament
Greek,
so far as those functions are expressed by the dis-
tinctions
of mood and tense.
The student of the New Testament who
would interpret it
with
accuracy and clearness must possess--along with other
qualifications
for his work--a knowledge of the distinctions
of
thought which are marked by the different moods and
tenses
of the Greek verb. If he would acquire facility in the
work
of interpretation, he must have an easy familiarity with
the
leading uses of each mood and tense. It is not enough
vi PREFACE.
that
he have at hand for reference an encyclopedic treatise on
the
subject. He must acquire, as a personal mental posses-
sion,
a knowledge of the leading functions of the several
forms
of the Greek verb, and of the forms which express
those
functions in English. For this purpose he needs a book
which,
availing itself of the assured results of comparative
and
historical grammar, and applying to the interpretation of
the
Greek verb the principles of grammar and logic, the laws
both
of Greek and of English speech, shall enumerate the
various
functions of each mood and tense, exhibit in some
degree
their relative importance, and define each clearly.
The
definitions should be scientifically accurate, but they
should
at the same time be constructed with reference to the
point
of view of the interpreter. For the English-speaking
student
English usage must be constantly considered and
must
frequently be defined and compared with Greek usage.
If
such a book does not solve all the problems of New
Testament
grammar, it should, by its treatment of those which
it
discusses, illustrate to the student the right method of
investigation
and so suggest the course which he must pursue
in
solving for himself those problems which the book leaves
unsolved.
My aim has been to provide a book fulfilling these
conditions.
The aim of the book has determined
the method of its con-
struction.
The usages which are of most frequent occurrence,
or
otherwise of especial importance, have been emphasized by
being
set in the largest type, with a title in bold-faced type.
The
table of contents also has been so constructed as to make
prominent
a conspectus of the leading uses. It may be well to
require
of students who use the book as a text-book that they
be
able to name and define these leading usages of each mood
and
tense; if they also commit to memory one of the Greek
examples
under each of these prominent usages, they will do
still
better.
The matter printed in smaller type
consists partly of fuller
exposition
of the usages defined in the more prominently
PREFACE. vii
printed
sections, partly of enumeration and definition of the
less
frequent usages. The portions in smallest type are
chiefly
discussions of the rarer or more difficult usages. They
are
an addition to the text-book proper, and are intended to
give
the work, to a limited extent, the character of a book of
reference.
The occasional discussions of English usage would
of
course have no place in a work on Greek grammar pure
and
simple, but to the end which this book is intended to
serve
they are as really germane as any discussions of the
force
of a Greek tense. One often fails to apprehend accu-
rately
a thought expressed in Greek quite as much through
inexact
knowledge of one's own language as through ignorance
of
Greek usage.
As concerns the extent to which I
have used the work of
others,
little need be added to the testimony which the pages
of
the book themselves bear. While gathering information
or
suggestion from all accessible sources, I have aimed to
make
no statement concerning New Testament usage which I
have
not myself proved by personal examination of the pas-
sages.
Respecting classical usage and pre-classical origins, I
have
relied upon those authorities which are recognized as
most
trustworthy.
On a subsequent page is added a list
of books and authors
referred
to by abbreviations in the body of the book. To all
of
the works there enumerated, as well as to those mentioned
by
full title in the body of the book, I am under obligation for
assistance
or suggestion. It is a pleasure also to acknowledge
the
valuable assistance privately given by various friends.
Prominent
among these, though not completing the list, are
Professor
W. G. Hale of the
sors
M. L. D'Ooge and W. W. Beman of the University of
of
William
Arnold Stevens of the
nary,
under whose instructions I first became interested in the
viii
PREFACE.
subject
of this book, and to whom my obligations in many
directions
are larger than can be acknowledged here.
In quoting examples from the New
Testament I have fol-
lowed
the Greek text of Westcott and Hort as that which
perhaps
most nearly represents the original text, but have
intended
to note any important variations of Tischendorf's
eighth
edition or of Tregelles in a matter affecting the point
under
discussion. The word text designates
the preferred
reading
of the editor referred to, as distinguished from the
marginal
reading. In the English translation of the examples
I
have preferred to follow the Revised Version of 1881 rather
than
to construct entirely independent translations. Yet in
not
a few passages it has seemed necessary to depart from
this
standard either because the revisers followed a Greek text
different
from that of Westcott and Hort, or because their
translation
obscured the value of the passage as an illustration
of
the grammatical principle under discussion, or occasionally
because
I was unwilling even to seem to approve what I
regarded
as unquestionably an error of translation.
While I have given all diligence to
make the book correct
in
statement and in type, I dare not hope that it has altogether
escaped
either typographical errors or those of a more serious
character.
I shall welcome most cordially criticisms, sugges-
tions,
or corrections from any teacher or student into whose
hands
the book may fall.
ERNEST
D. BURTON
NOTE
TO THE THIRD EDITION.--It having become necessary to send the
plates
of this book to the press again, I have availed myself of the opportunity
to
correct such errors, typographical and other, as "have come to my
attention,
and
to make a few alterations of statement which use of the book has convinced
me
are desirable. The chief changes are in §§ 67 Rem. 1, 98, 120, 137, 142-145,
153, 189, 195, 198, 200 Rem., 202, 225, 235, 236, 318, 325-328, 344 Rem. 2, 352
Rem.,
406, 407, 485.
CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTORY.
SECTION
PAGE
1. Form and Function. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. The Interpreter's Relation to
Grammar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5
3, 4. The four Moods and the seven Tenses .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
THE TENSES.
5.
Two-fold Function of the Tenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE MOOD.
6, 7. General Definition of the Tenses of
the Indicative . . . . . . . . . 6, 7
The Present Indicative.
8-10. PROGRESSIVE PRESENT. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,
8
11. Conative
Present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
12. GENERAL OR GNOMIC PRESENT . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
13. AORISTIC PRESENT . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
14. HISTORICAL PRESENT. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
15. PRESENT FOR THE FUTURE . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 10
16. Present
of h!kw, pa<reimi, etc. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
17. PRESENT OF PAST ACTION STILL IN
PROGRESS. . . . . . . 10
18. Similar
use of the Aorist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
19. Present
in Indirect Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
20. Periphrastic
Form of the Present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
The Imperfect Indicative.
21,
22. PROGRESSIVE IMPERFECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
23. Conative
Imperfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
24. IMPERFECT OF REPEATED ACTION . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
25-27.
Minor uses of Secondary Tenses
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
28,
29. Imperfect translated by
English Perfect and Pluperfect . .
. 13,
14
30-32. Imperfect of Verbs denoting
obligation, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . .
14, 15
33. Imperfect
of Verbs of wishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 16
34. Periphrastic
Form of the Imperfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
ix
x
CONTENTS.
The Aorist Indicative.
SECTION
PAGE
35. Fundamental.
Idea of the Aorist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16, 17
36. Additional
uses of the Aorist Indicative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 18
37. Functions
of the Aorist distinguished . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 19
38-40. HISTORICAL AORIST. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 19, 20
41. INCEPTIVE AORIST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 20, 21
42. RESULTATIVE AORIST . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
43. GNOMIC AORIST. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
44. EPISTOLARY AORIST. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
45. DRAMATIC AORIST . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
46. Aorist
for the (English) Perfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
47. Use
of the Aorists a]pe<qanon, e]ce<sth, e@gnwn . . . . . . . . 22
48. Aorist
for the (English) Pluperfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 23
49. Aorist
Indicative in Indirect Discourse . . . . . . . . . . 23
50. Aorist
used proleptically . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
51. Minor
uses of the Aorist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
52-55. English
Equivalents of the Greek Aorist Indica-
tive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-30
56, 57. Distinction
between the Aorist and the Imperfect. . . . 30, 31
The Future Indicative.
58-66. PREDICTIVE FUTURE. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-35
59. Aoristic
Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
60. Progressive
Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
61, 62. Relation
of Aoristic and Progressive Future. . . . . . . 32, 38
63, 64. Types
of Aoristic Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 34
65. Predictive
Future as assertive or promissory. . . . . . 34,
35
66. Predictive
Future with ou] mh<. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 35
67, 68. IMPERATIVE FUTURE . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
69. GNOMIC FUTURE . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
35
70. DELIBERATIVE FUTURE. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
71. Periphrastic Form of the Future .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
72, 73. Me<llw with the Infinitive. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36, 37
The Perfect Indicative.
74. PERFECT OF COMPLETED ACTION. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
75, 76. PERFECT OF EXISTING STATE. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,38
77. Intensive
Perfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
78. Historical
Perfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38, 39
79. Gnomic
Perfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
CONTENTS.
xi
SECTION
PAGE
80. Aoristic
Perfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
81. Perfect
Indicative in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . 39
82. Perfect
Indicative translated by English Past. . .. 39,
40
83. Perfect
used proleptically . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 40
84. Periphrastic
Form of the Perfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
85. Definition
of the term "complete” . . . . . .
. . . . . 40, 41
86-88. Aorist
and Perfect compared. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-44
The Pluperfect.
89. PLUPERFECT OF COMPLETED ACTION.
. . . . . . . . . . 44
90. PLUPERFECT OF EXISTING STATE . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 44, 45
91. Periphrastic
Form of the Pluperfect. ...45
92. Pluperfect
and Aorist siInilarly translated. . . . . .
45
The Future Perfect.
93. Simple Future Perfect. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
94. Periphrastic Future Perfect. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
TENSES OF THE DEPENDENT
MOODS.
95. General Principles . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
96, 97. PRESENT OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. .
. . . . . . . . . 46
98. AORIST OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. .
. . . . . . . . . . . 46, 47
99,100. FUTURE OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS . . .
. . . . . . . . . 47,48
101-103. PERFECT OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. . . .
. . . . . . . . 48,49
104-109. Tenses
of the Infinitive after Prepositions. . . . . . . . . . . . 49-51
110-114. Tenses
of the Dependent Moods in Indirect
Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-53
TENSES OF THE PARTICIPLE.
115-118. General Principles. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,
54
The Present Participle.
119. PRESENT PARTICIPLE OF SIMULTANEOUS
ACTION. 54,55
120-122.
PRESENT PARTICIPLE OF IDENTICAL ACTION. . . . . .
. 55,56
123-126.
GENERAL PRESENT PARTICIPLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-58
127. PRESENT PARTICIPLE FOR THE IMPERFECT
. . . . . . . . . 58
128-131.
Minor uses of the Present
Participle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58,
59
xii
CONTENTS.
The Aorist Participle.
SECTION
PAGE
132,
133. General Force of
the Aorist Participle. . . . . . . . . . . 59-63
134-138.
AORIST PARTICIPLE OF ANTECEDENT ACTION. . . . . . 63,64
139-141.
AORIST P.ARTICIPLE OF IDENTICAL ACTION. . . . . . . . 64,65
142-145.
AORIST PARTICIPLE OF SUBSEQUENT ACTION. . . . . . 65-67
146. AORIST PARTICIPLE WITH THE OBJECT
OF A VERB OF
PERCEPTION. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
147. Aorist
Participle with lanqa<nw. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 67
148,
149. Exceptional uses of the Aorist
Participle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67,
68
150,
151. Equivalence of the
Aorist Participle . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-70
The Future Participle.
152. GENERAL FORCE OF THE FUTURE
PARTICIPLE. . . . . 70, 71
153. Me<llwn with the Infinitive,
denoting inten-
tion, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 71
The Perfect Participle.
154,
155. GENERAL FORCE OF THE PERFECT PARTICIPLE . . . . . 71, 72
156. Perfect
Participle used as a Pluperfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
THE
MOODS.
MOODS IN
PRINCIPAL CLAUSES.
The Indicative Mood.
157. GENERAL FORCE OF THE INDICATIVE .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 73
158,
169. INDICATIVE IN QUALIFIED ASSERTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . 73, 74
The Subjunctive Mood.
160,
161. HORTATORY SUBJUNCTIVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74, 75
162-167. PROHIBITORY SUBJUNCTIVE. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 76
168-171. DELIBERATIVE SUBJUNCTIVE. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76-78
172,
173. SUBJUNCTIVE IN NEGATIVE ASSERTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . 78
The Optative Mood.
174. Infrequency
of the Optative in later Greek.. . . . . . . . 79
175-177.
OPTATIVE OF WISHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
178,
179. POTENTIAL OPTATIVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79, 80
CONTENTS.
xiii
The Imperative Mood
SECTION
PAGE
180. IMPERATIVE IN COMMANDS AND
EXHORTATIONS. 80
181. IMPERATIVE IN ENTREATIES AND
PETITIONS. . . . . 80
182,183.
IMPERATIVE TO EXPRESS CONSENT OR AN HYPOTHESIS 80, 81
184. Tenses
of the Imperative in Commands and Pro-
hibitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 81
FINITE MOODS IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES.
185-187.
Subordinate Clauses Classified. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
81-83
Moods in Clauses Introduced by Final
Particles.
188,189.
Classification and General Usage. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83, 84
190-196.
New Testament Use of Final
Particles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84,
85
197-199.
PURE FINAL CLAUSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85, 86
200-204.
OBJECT CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF EXHORTING, etc. . 87, 88
205-210.
OBJECT CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF STRIVING, etc. 88-90
211-214.
SUBJECT, PREDICATE, AND APPOSITIVE CLAUSES INTRO-
DUCED
BY i!na. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,
91
215-217.
COMPLEMENTARY AND EPEXEGETIC CLAUSES INTRO-
DUCED
BY i!na.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91, 92
218-223.
CLAUSES OF CONCEIVED RESULT INTRODUCED BY i!na 92-95
224-227.
OBJECT CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF FEAR AND DANGER 95,96
Moods in Clauses of Cause.
228. Definition. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
229,
230. Moods and Tenses in Causal Clauses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 97
231,
232. Independent Causal Sentences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 98
233. Other Methods of Expressing Cause
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
234. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
235. Distinction between Indicative
and Infinitive in Con-
secutive Clauses. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
236. Indicative with w!ste. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
99, 100
237. Independent Consecutive
Sentences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Moods in Conditional Sentences.
238-241.
Definition and Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 100, 101
242-247.
SIMPLE PRESENT OR PAST PARTICULAR SUPPOSITION 102, 103
xiv
CONTENTS.
SECTION
PAGE
248,
249. SUPPOSITION CONTRARY TO FACT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103,
104
250. FUTURE SUPPOSITION WITH MORE
PROBABILITY . . . 104
251-256.
Variant Forms. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104, 105
257. Particular
and General Suppositions referring
to the Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 106
258. Present
and Future Suppositions in Indirect
Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 106
259. FUTURE SUPPOSITION WITH LESS
PROBABILITY . . . 106, 107
260,
261. PRESENT GENERAL SUPPOSITION. 107 108
262,
263. Third and Fifth
Classes compared. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
108
264. First
and Fifth Classes compared. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
265. [PAST GENERAL SUP:POSITION]. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
266-277.
Peculiarities of
Conditional Sentences. . . . . . . . . . .
109-112
Moods in Concessive Sentences.
278. Definition
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112,
113
279-282.
Ei] kai< and kai> ei] in Concessive Clauses.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113, 114
283. General Usage of Moods and
Tenses in Con-
cessive Clauses. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
284. CONCESSIVE CLAUSES OF THE FIRST
CLASS. . . . . . . 114
285. CONCESSIVE CLAUSES REFERRING TO
THE FUTURE.114, 115
286. Concessive Clauses of the
Fourth Class. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
287. Concessive Clauses of the Fifth
Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
115
288. Concessive Particles in English.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115, 116
Moods in Relative Clauses.
289-291. Definition and Classification.. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
116, 117
I. DEFINITE RELATIVE CLAUSES.
292. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117, 118
293. Moods in Definite Relative Clauses
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
294. Definite Relative Clauses implying
cause, result,
or concession. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
295. Restrictive and Explanatory
Relative Clauses. . . . . . . . . . . . .
119
II.
CONDITIONAL RELATIVE SENTENCES.
296-300.
Definition and
Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119-121
301. SIMPLE PRESENT OR PAST PARTICULAR
SUPPOSITION . 121
302. [SUPPOSITION CONTRARY TO FACT] . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
CONTENTS. xv
SECTION
PAGE
303-305.
FUTURE SUPPOSITION WITH MORE PROBABILITY.
121, 122
306-309.
Variant Forms. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122,
123
310. Particular
and General Suppositions referring
to the future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
311. [FUTURE SUPPOSITION WITH LESS
PROBABILITY]. . . 123
312-314.
PRESENT GENERAL SUPPOSITION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123,
124
315. PAST GENERAL SUPPOSITION. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124, 125
316. Clauses conditional in form, but
definite in sense . . . . . . . . . . 125
III. RELATIVE CLAUSES EXPRESSING PURPOSE.
317. RELATIVE CLAUSES OF PURE PURPOSE. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
318-320.
Complementary Relative Clauses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125, 126
IV. RELATIVE CLAUSES
INTRODUCED BY WORDS MEANING
UNTIL, WHILE, AND BEFORE.
321. Definition
of e!wj . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126, 127
322,
323. CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY e!wj AND REFERRING TO THE
FUTURE. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
324-326.
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY e!wj AND REFERRING TO
WHAT WAS IN PAST TIME A FUTURE
CONTINGENCY . . 127, 128
327.
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY e!wj (UNTIL), AND REFER-
RING TO A PAST FACT. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
128
328,
329. CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY e!wj (WHILE), AND REFER-
RING TO A CONTEMPORANEOUS EVENT. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 128
330. !Ewj followed by ou# or o!tou
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128, 129
331,
332. Clauses introduced by a@xri,
a@xri ou$
etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
333.
Clauses introduced by pri<n
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Moods in Indirect Discourse.
334-340.
Definition and Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 130-132
341,
342. Classical Usage in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 132
343-346.
New Testament Usage in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132-134
347. Single
dependent Clauses in Indirect Discourse . . . . 134
348. Imperfect
for Present, and Pluperfect for Per-
fect in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 134, 135
349,
350. Relative Pronouns
in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . .
135
351-356.
Indirect Discourse in
English and in Greek
Construction after Kai> e]ge<neto
357-360.
Three Forms of the Idiom. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 142, 143
xvi
CONTENTS.
THE
INFINITIVE.
SECTION
PAGE
361-363.
Origin, and Classification of Uses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143-145
The Infinitive without the
Article.
364,
365. IMPERATIVE INFINITIVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
366,
367. INFINITIVE OF PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
368. INFINITIVE AS AN INDIRECT OBJECT. .
. . . . . . . . . . 147
369-371.
INFINITIVE OF RESULT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147-150
372-374.
Exceptional usages. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
150
375.
INFINITIVE DEFINING CONTENT OF A PREVIOUS VERB
OR NOUN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 151
376,
377. INFINITIVE LIMITING ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS. 151
378,
379. INFINITIVE LIMITING NOUNS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151, 152
380-382.
INFINITIVE AFTER pri<n or pri>n h@ . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 152
383. INFINITIVE USED ABSOLUTELY. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
384,
385. INFINITIVE AS SUBJECT. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 153
386. INFINITIVE AS APPOSITIVE . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
387-389.
INFINITIVE AS OBJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153, 154
390. Infinitive
in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154, 155
391. Infinitive
after verbs of hoping, promising, swear-
ing, commanding, etc. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
The Infinitive with the Article.
392.
General Use of Infinitive with the
Article. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
155, 156
393.
INFINITIVE WITH to< AS SUBJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 156
394.
INFINITIVE WITH to< AS OBJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 156
395.
INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE, IN APPOSITION. . . . . . . 156, 157
396.
INFINITIVE WITH t&? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 157
397.
INFINITIVE OF PURPOSE WITH tou? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
398.
INFINITIVE OF RESULT WITH tou? . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 157, 158
399.
INFINITIVE WITH tou? AFTER ADJECTIVES. . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
400.
INFINITIVE WITH tou? AFTER NOUNS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 158
401.
INFINITIVE WITH tou? AFTER VERBS THAT TAKE THE
GENITIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158, 159
402,
403. Various constructions after
Verbs of hindering . . . . . . . . 159
404,
405. INFINITIVE WITH tou? AS SUBJECT OR OBJECT. . . . . 159, 160
406-417.
INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE GOVERNED BY PREPO-
SITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160-163
CONTENTS. xvii
THE
PARTICIPLE.
SECTION
PAGE
418. General Nature of the Participle. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
419. Classification respecting logical
force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163, 164
The Adjective
Participle.
420,
421. Definition and
Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . 164
422. RESTRICTIVE ATTRIBUTIVE PARTICIPLE.
. . . . . . 164, 165
423. Restrictive
Attributive Participle with Subject
omitted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
424. Noun
without the article limited by a Participle
with the article. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
425. Neuter
Participle with the article equivalent to an
abstract Noun. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
426. EXPLANATORY ATTRIBUTIVE PARTICIPLE .
. . . . . . 166
427. Order
of words with Attributive Participle
limiting a Noun with the article. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 166, 167
428. Attributive
Participle conveying a subsidiary idea
of cause, purpose, etc. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
429,
430. PREDICATIVE ADJECTIVE PARTICIPLE. . . . . . . . . 167
431. Predicative
Participle used to form periphrastic
tenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
432,
433. Participles in Predicate in
various construc-
tions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168, 169
The Adverbial Participle.
434. Definition. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 169
435. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF TIME. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 169
436. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF CONDITION. . . . . . . . . 169
437,
438. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF CONCESSION. .
. . . . 170
439. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF CAUSE. . .
. . . . . . . . . . 170
440,
441. Participle of Cause with w[j
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170,
171
442. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF PURPOSE . .
. . . . . . . . 171
443.
ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF MEANS. . . . . . . . . . . . 171
444. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF MANNER. . .
. . . . . . . . 171
445,
446. [Wj with the Participle
denoting Manner . . . . . . . . . 172
447. Participle
of Manner or Means denoting same
action as that of the principal Verb. . . .
. . . . . . . . . 172, 173
448. I ntensive
Participle-Hebraistic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
xviii
CONTENTS.
SECTION
PAGE
449,
450. ADVERBUL PARTICIPLE OF ATTENDANT CIRCUM.
STANCE. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173,174
451. More
than one adverbial relation implied by
the same Participle. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 174
452-454.
Genitive Absolute. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174,
175
455. Position
of Adverbial Participle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
The Substantive Participle.
456. Definition.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
457. SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE AS SUBJECT. .
. . . . . . 175
458,
459. SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE AS OBJECT. . . . . . . . . 176
460. Substantive
Participle in Indirect Discourse. . 176
461. SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE AS A
LIMITING GENITIVE 176
462. Position
of Substantive Participle. . . . . . . . . . . . 177
463. Substantive
Participle distinguished from Ad.
jective Participle used substantively. . .
. . . . . . . . . . 177
THE USE OF NEGATIVES WITH VERBS.
464. General Usage. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
NEGATIVES WITH THE INDICATIVE.
465. Negatives in Independent declaratory
Sentences. . . . . . . . . . 178
466. Negatives with a Prohibitory Future.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
467. Negatives in Questions. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
468. Mh> ou] in Rhetorical Questions. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
469,
470. Negatives in Conditional and Conditional Relative
Clauses.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179, 180
471. Ei] mh< in the sense of except.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
472. Ou] after mh< as a conjunction. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
473. Negatives in Indirect Discourse. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
474. Negatives in Causal Clauses and in
simple Relative
Clauses
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
NEGATIVES WITH THE SUBJUNCTIVE, OPTATIVE,
AND IMPERATIVE.
475. Negatives with the Subjunctive. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181, 182
476,
477. Negatives with the Optative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
182
479. Negatives with the Imperative. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
182, 183
CONTENTS.
xix
NEGATIVES WITH THE INFINITIVE AND PARTICIPLE.
SECTION PAGE
480. General Usage of Negatives with the
Infinitive. . . . . . . . . . 183
481. Negatives with a limitation of an
Infinitive or of its
subject.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183,184
482. Compound of ou] with an Infinitive
dependent on a
principal
verb limited by ou] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
483. Redundant mh< with Infinitive after
verbs of hinder-
ing,
denying, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
484. Negative with Infinitive dependent
on a verb itself
egatived
by ou] .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
485. General Usage of Negatives with the
Participle. . . . . . . . . . 184, 185
SUCCESSIVE AND DOUBLE NEGATIVES.
486. Two simple Negatives, or a compound
Negative fol-
lowed
by a simple Negative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
487,
488. Double Negative ou] mh<. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 185, 186
489. Negative followed by similar
compound Negative or
double
Negative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
LIST OF WORKS AND AUTHORS
REFERRED TO
BY ABBREVIATION.
A.J.P. . . . . . American Journal of Philology.
Alf. . . . . . .
Henry Alford, The Greek New Testament. 4 vols. Lon-
don.
A.
V. . . . . . Authorized Version of the New Testament.
B. . . . . . . . . Alexander
Buttmann, A Grammar of the New Testament
Greek.
Translated by J. H. Thayer.
Bib. Sac. . . . Bibliotheca Sacra.
Br. . . . . . . . . Karl
Brugmann, Griechische Grammatik, in Iwan Mul-
ler's
Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft,
vol. II.
Second Edition. Munchen, 1890.
Cl. Rev. . . . . Classical Review.
1888.
Ev. Pet.. . . . Apocryphal Gospel of Peter. (Verses according
to the
edition of
Harnack,
G. . . . . . . . . W. W.
Goodwin, A Greek Grammar. Revised Edition.
Gild. . . . . . . Basil
L. Gildersleeve, various papers in A.J.P.
and
T.A.P.A.
G.MT.
. . . . . W. W. Goodwin, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the
Greek Verb.
Revised and enlarged.
Gr. . . . . . . . . Thomas
Sheldon Green, A Treatise on the Grammar of
the New
Testament. New Edition.
HA. . . . . . . . James
Hadley, A Greek Grammar for Schools and
leges.
Revised by F. D. Allen.
Hr. . . . . . . . . W. R.
Harper, Elements of Hebrew Syntax.
1888.
J. . . . . . . . . J. W.
E. Jelf, A Grammar of the Greek Language. Third
Edition. 2
vols.
J.B.L. . . . . . . Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature
and Exegesis.
K. . . . . . . . . . Raphael
Kuhner, Grammatik der Griechischen Sprache.
Ka. . . . . . . . . E.
Kautzsch, Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramaischen.
xxi
xxii
LIST OF WORKS AND
AUTHORS.
L.
and S. . . . Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, etc. Seventh
Edition.
Ltft. . . . . . . . J. B.
Lightfoot, Commentaries on Galatians, on Philip-
pians, and
on Colossians and Philemon.
Mart.
Polyc. . Martyrium Polycarpi. (See any edition
of the Apostolic
Fathers. )
Meist. . . . . . K. Meisterhans,
Grammatik der Attischen Inschriften.
Mey. . . . . . . H. A.
W. Meyer, Kommentar iiber das Neue Testament.
1873-1880.
Ps.
Sol. . . . . The Psalms of Solomon.
(Recent edition by Ryle and
James,
R.
V. . . . . . . The New Testament in the
Revised Version of 1881.
S. . . . . . . . . . W. H. Simcox,
The Language of the New Testament.
Th.
. . . . . . . . J. H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament:
Being Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testa-
menti,
translated, revised, and enlarged.
1886.
Tisch.
. . . . . Constantinus Tischendorf, Novum Testamentum Graece.
Eighth
Edition. 2 vols.
Treg.
. . . . . . S. P. Tregelles, The Greek New Testament.
1857-79.
T.A.P.A. . . . Transactions
of the American Philological Association.
W. . . . . . . . . G. B.
Winer. See WE and WT.
WH. . . . . . . . Westcott
and Hort, The New Testament in the Original
Greek, the
text revised by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A.
Hort. 2
vols.
WT . . . . . . . G. B.
Winer, A Treatise on the Grammar of New Testa-
ment Greek.
Translated by W. F. Moulton. Third
Edition.
WM. . . . . . . . G. B.
Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Tes-
tament.
Seventh Edition, enlarged and improved by
Gottlieb Lunemann.
Revised and authorized Trans-
lation by J.
H. Thayer.
WS. . . . . . . . G. B.
Winer's Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprach-
idioms,
Achte Auflage, neu bearbeitet von D. Paul Wilh.
Schmiedel,
For classical and Scripture writers the ordinary
abbreviations are used.
References
to the Old Testament are to the Septuagint Version, unless
otherwise
indicated.
SYNTAX
OF THE
MOODS AND TENSES IN NEW TESTAMENT
GREEK.
INTRODUCTORY
1. FORM AND FUNCTION. The following
pages deal with
the
various functions of the various verb-forms of the Greek
of
the New Testament, so far as respects their mood and
tense.
It is important that the nature of the relation between
form
and function be clearly held in mind. It is by no means
the
case that each form has but one function, and that each
function
can be discharged by but one form. Forms of various
origin
may be associated together under one name and perform
the
same function, or group of functions. Compare, e.g., the
Aorist
Active Infinitives, lu?sai and ei]
quite
diverse origin; in function they have become entirely
assimilated.
The same is true of the Aorist Active Indicatives,
e@deica and e@sthn. Forms also which still
have different names,
and
usually perform different functions, may have certain
functions
in common. Compare the Aorist Subjunctive and
the
Future Indicative in clauses of purpose (197, 198). On
the
other hand, and to an even greater extent, we find that a
given
form, or a given group of forms bearing a common name,
performs
various distinct functions. Observe, e.g., the various
functions
of the Aorist Indicative (38-48).
1
2
INTRODUCTORY.
The name of a given form, or group
of forms, is usually
derived
from some prominent function of the form or group.
Thus
the term Aorist reflects the fact that the forms thus
designated
most frequently represent an action indefinitely
without
reference to its progress. The name Present suggests
that
the forms thus designated denote present time, which is
true,
however, of the smaller part only of those that bear the
name,
and of none of them invariably. The name Optative
again
reminds us that one function of the forms so named is
to
express a wish. While, therefore, the names of the forms
were
originally intended to designate their respective func-
tions,
they cannot now be regarded as descriptive of the actual
functions,
but must be taken as conventional, and to a con-
siderable
extent arbitrary, names of the forms. The functions
must
be learned, not from the names, but from observation of
the
actual usage.
2.
THE INTERPRETER'S RELATION TO GRAMMAR. Both the
grammarian
as such and the interpreter deal with grammar, but
from
very different points of view. The distinction between
these
points of view should be clearly recognized by the in-
terpreter.
It may be conveniently represented by the terms
historical
grammar and exegetical grammar. Historical gram-
mar
deals with the development of both form and function
through
the various periods of the history of the language,
and
does this in purely objective fashion. Exegetical grammar,
on
the other hand, takes the forms as it finds them, and defines
the
functions which at a given period each form discharged,
and
does this from the point of view of the interpreter, for
the
purpose of enabling him to reproduce the thought con-
veyed
by the form. To investigate the process by which the
several
forms were built up, to determine the earliest function
of
each such form, to show how out of this earliest function
INTRODUCTORY. 3
others
were developed, and how forms of different origin, and
presumably
at first of different function, became associated,
discharging
the same function and eventually coming to bear
the
same name--all this belongs to historical grammar. To
reproduce
in the mind of the interpreter, and to express as
nearly
as may be in his own tongue, the exact thought
which
a given form was in the period in question capable of
expressing--this
is the task of exegetical grammar. Histori-
cal
grammar views its problem wholly from the point of view
of
the language under investigation, without reference to the
language
of the grammarian. Exegetical grammar is neces-
sarily
concerned both with the language under investigation
and
with that in which the interpreter thinks and speaks,
since
its problem is to aid in reproducing in the latter tongue
thought
expressed in the former.
The results of historical grammar
are of the greatest interest
and
value to exegetical grammar. Our interpretation of the
phenomena
of language in its later periods can hardly fail to
be
affected by a knowledge of the earlier history. Strictly
speaking,
however, it is with the results only of the processes
of
historical grammar that the interpreter is concerned. If
the
paradigm has been rightly constructed, so that forms of
diverse
origin perhaps, but completely assimilated in function,
bear
a common name, exegetical grammar is concerned only to
know
what are the functions which each group of forms bear-
ing
a common name is capable of discharging. Thus, the
diversity
of origin of the two Aorists, e@lusa and e@lipon, does
not
immediately concern the interpreter, if it is an assured
result
of historical grammar that these two forms are com-
pletely
assimilated in function. Nor does it concern him that
the
ai
at the end of the Infinitives, dei?cai and i]e<nai, is the mark
of
the Dative case, and that the earliest use of such infinitives
was
as a verbal noun in the Dative case, except as this fact
4
INTRODUCTORY.
of
historical grammar aids him in the interpretation of the
phenomena
of that period of the language with which he is
dealing.
The one question of exegetical grammar to which
all
other questions are subsidiary is, What function did this
form,
or group of forms, discharge at the period with which
we
are dealing? What, e.g., in the New Testament, are the
functions
of the Present Indicative? What are the uses of
the
Aorist Subjunctive?
For practical convenience forms are
grouped together, and
the
significance of each of the distinctions made by inflection
discussed
by itself. The present work confines itself to the
discussion
of mood and tense, and discusses these as far as
possible
separately. Its question therefore is, What in the
New
Testament are the functions of each tense and of each
mood?
These various functions must be defined first of all
from
the point of view of the Greek language itself. Since,
however,
the interpreter whom in the present instance it is
sought
to serve thinks in English, and seeks to express in
English
the thought of the Greek, reference must be had
also
to the functions of the English forms as related to
those
of the Greek forms. Since, moreover, distinctions of
function
in the two languages do not always correspond,
that
is, since what in Greek is one function of a given form
may
be in English subdivided into several functions per-
formed
by several forms, it becomes necessary not only to
enumerate
and define the functions of a given form purely
from
the point of view of Greek, but to subdivide the one
Greek
function into those several functions which in English
are
recognized and marked by the employment of different
forms.
An enumeration of the uses of a given Greek tense
made
for the use of an English interpreter may therefore
properly
include certain titles which would not occur in a
list
made for one to whom Greek was the language of
INTRODUCTORY. 5
ordinary
speech and thought. The Aorist for the English
Perfect,
and the Aorist for the English Pluperfect (46, 48)
furnish
a pertinent illustration. The interests of the English
interpreter
require that they be clearly recognized. Fidelity
to
Greek usage requires that they be recognized as, strictly
speaking,
true Historical Aorists.
3. The Greek verb has four moods,--the
Indicative, the
Subjunctive,
the Optative, and the Imperative. With these
are
associated in the study of Syntax the Infinitive, which is,
strictly
speaking, a verbal noun, and the Participle, which is
a
verbal adjective.
The Subjunctive, Optative, Imperative,
and Infinitive are
often
called dependent moods.
REM. The term dependent is not
strictly applicable to these moods,
and least of all to the Imperative, which
almost always stands as a prin-
cipal verb. It has, however, become an
established term, and is retained
as a matter of convenience.
4. There are seven tenses
in the Greek,--the Present,
Imperfect,
Aorist, Future, Perfect, Pluperfect, and Future
Perfect.
Those
tenses which denote present or future time are called
Primary
tenses. Those tenses which denote past time are
called
Secondary tenses. Since the time denoted by a tense
varies
with the particular use of the tense, no fixed line of
division
can be drawn between the two classes of tenses. In
the
Indicative the Present and Perfect are usually, and the
Future
and Future Perfect are always, Primary tenses; the
Imperfect,
Aorist, and Pluperfect are usually Secondary
tenses.
THE TENSES.
5. The action denoted by
a verb may be defined by the tense
of
the verb
(a)
As respects its progress. Thus it may
be represented
as
in progress, or as completed, or indefinitely, i.e. as a
simple
event without reference to
progress or completion.
(b)
As respects its time, as past, present, or future.
The
tenses of the Indicative mood in general define the
action
of the verb in both these respects.
The tenses of the other moods in
general define the action
of
the verb only as respects its progress. HA.
821; G. 1249.
REM. The chief function of a Greek tense is thus not to denote time,
but
progress. This latter function belongs to the tense-forms of all the
moods,
the former to those of the Indicative only.
TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE MOOD.
6. The significance of the tenses of
the Indicative mood
may
be stated in general as follows: --
As respects progress: The Present
and Imperfect denote
action
in progress; the Perfect, Pluperfect, and Future Perfect
denote
completed action; the Aorist represents the action
indefinitely
as an event or single fact; the Future is used
either
of action in progress like the Present, or indefinitely
like
the Aorist.
As respects time: The Present and
Perfect denote present
time;
the Imperfect, Aorist, and Pluperfect denote past time;
the
Future and Future Perfect denote future time.
6
THE PRESENT INDICATIVE 7
7.
The tenses of the Indicative in general denote time rela-
tive
to that of speaking. Most exceptions to this rule are
apparent
or rhetorical rather than real and grammatical. In
indirect
discourse the point of view, as respects time, of the
original
speaking or thinking is retained. Cf. 351. Of two
verbs
of past time, one may refer to an action antecedent to
the
other, but this fact of antecedence is implied in the con-
text,
not expressed in the tense. Cf. 29 and 48. By prolepsis
also
a verb of past time may refer to or include events to take
place
after the time of speaking, but before a point of future
time
spoken of in the context. Cf. 50. In conditional sen-
tences
of the second form, the tenses are properly timeless.
Cf.
248. See
THE PRESENT INDICATIVE.
8.
The Progressive Present. The Present Indicative
is
used of action in progress in present time. HA.
824;
G. 1250, 1.
Matt.
25:8; ai[ lampa<dej h[mw?n sbe<nnuntai, our lamps are going out
Gal.
1:6; qauma<zw o!ti
ou!twj taxe<wj metati<qesqe a]po> tou? kale<san-
toj u[ma?j, I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called
you.
9. The most constant characteristic
of the Present Indica-
tive
is that it denotes action in progress. It probably had
originally
no reference to present time (see
since,
in the" historical periods of the language, action in
progress
in past time is expressed by the Imperfect, and the
Future
is used both as a progressive and as an aoristic tense
for
future time, it results that the Present Indicative is chiefly
used
to express action in progress in present time. Hence
in
deciding upon the significance of any given instance of the
Present
Indicative in the New Testament as well as in classi-
8
THE
TENSES.
cal
Greek, the interpreter may consider that there is, at least
in
the majority of words, a certain presumption in favor of
the
Progressive Present rather than any of the other uses
mentioned
below.
10.
The Progressive Present in Greek is not always best
translated
by what is commonly called in English the "Pro-
gressive
Form." Some English verbs themselves suggest
action
in progress, and do not, except when there is strong
emphasis
on the progressive idea, use the progressive form.
Thus
the verb (qauma<zw), in Gal. 1:6, is a Progressive Present,
but
is best translated I marvel, the verb itself sufficiently sug-
gesting
the idea of action in progress.
11.
THE CONATIVE PRESENT. The Present Indicative is
occasionally
used of action attempted, but not accomplished.
H.A. 825; G. 1255. This use is, however, not to be
re-
garded
as a distinct function of the tense. The Conative
Present
is merely a species of the Progressive Present. A
verb
which of itself suggests effort, when used in a tense
which
implies action in progress, and hence incomplete, natu-
rally
suggests the idea of attempt. All the verb-forms of the
Present
system are equally, with the Present, capable of
expressing
attempted action, since they all denote action in
progress.
John
trate
this usage in the Present. Similar is the use of the
Present
in
For examples of the Imperfect see
23. Respecting the
resultative
force of such verbs in the Aorist see 42.
12.
The General or Gnomic Present. The Present
Indicative
is used to express customary actions and general
truths.
HA. 824, a; G. 1253, 1291.
Matt.
bringeth forth good fruit.
THE PRESENT INDICATIVE. 9
2
Cor. 9:7; i[laro>n ga>r do<thn a]gap%? o[ qeo<j, for God
loveth a cheerful
giver.
13. The Aoristic Present. The Present Indicative is
sometimes
used of an action or event coincident in time
with
the act of speaking, and conceived of as a simple
event.
Most frequently the action denoted by the verb
is
identical with the act of speaking itself, or takes place
in
that act.
Acts
thee in the name of Jesus Christ. See also Mark 2:5, a]fi<entai; Acts
ous instances of le<gw in the gospels.
REM. This usage is a distinct
departure from the prevailing use of
the
Present tense to denote action in progress (cf. 9). There being in the
Indicative
no tense which represents an event as a simple fact without at
the
same time assigning it either to the past or the future, the Present is
used
for those instances (rare as compared with the cases of the Pro-
gressive
Present), in which an action of present time is conceived of
without
reference to its progress.
14.
The Historical Present. The Present
Indicative
is
used to describe vividly a past event in the presence of
which
the speaker conceives himself to be. HA.
828;
G. 1252.
Mark
to
This use is very frequent in the
gospels.
15.
The Present for the Future. In a
similar way
the
Present Indicative may be used to describe vividly a
future
event.
Mark
Son of man is delivered into the hands of men. See also Matt. 26:18,
poiw?; 27:63, e]gei<romai; Luke 3:9, e]kko<ptetai.
10
THE
TENSES.
REM. The term "Present for Future" is
sometimes objected to, but
without
good reason. The arguments of Buttmann, pp. 203 f., and Winer,
WT. pp. 265 ff.; WM. pp. 331 ff., are valid only against
the theory of an
arbitrary
interchange of tenses. It is indeed not to be supposed that
Greek
writers confused the Present and the Future tenses, or used them
indiscriminately.
But that the form which customarily denoted an act
in
progress at the time of speaking was sometimes, for the sake of vivid-
ness,
used with reference to a fact still in the future, is recognized by all
grammarians.
See; e.g., J. 397; K. 382, 5; G.MT. 32. The whole force
of
the idiom is derived from the unusualness of the tense employed.
16. The Present form h!kw
means I have come ( John 2:4;
I have arrived (Acts 17:6; etc.).
This, however, is not a
Present
for the Perfect of the same verb, but a Present
equivalent
to the Perfect of another verb. The use of a]kou<w
meaning
I am informed (cf. similar use of
English hear, see,
learn) is more nearly a
proper Present for Perfect (1 Cor.
a
very few verbs. HA. 827; G. 1256.
17. The Present of past Action still in Progress.
The
Present Indicative, accompanied by an adverbial
expression
denoting duration and referring to past time,
is
sometimes used in Greek, as in German, to describe
an
action which, beginning in past time, is still in prog-
ress
at the time of speaking. English idiom requires
the
use of the Perfect in such cases. HA.
826; G. 1258.
Acts
sontaj au]to>n
e@xei, for Moses from generations of old has had in
every
city them
that preached him.
See also Luke 13:7, e@rxomai 15:29,
douleu<w; John 5:6, e@xei; 2 Tim.
almost always incorrectly rendered in R. V.
REM. Cf. Br.
156, "Das Prasens in Verbindung mit pa<roj,
pa<lai,
pote< wurde seit Homer gebraucht, um eine
Handlung auszudrucken, die
sich
durch die Vergangenheit bis zur Zeit des Sprechens hinzieht." In
the
New Testament examples definite expressions of past time occur in
place
of the adverbs pa<roj, etc.
THE PRESENT INDICATIVE. 11
18. The Aorist Indicative,
limited by an expression mean-
ing
up to this time, may also be used of
acts. beginning in past
time
and continuing to the time of speaking. Matt. 27:8;
28:15.
Cf. 46, and 52.
19. Verbs in indirect
discourse retain the point of view, as
respects
time, of the original statement; a Progressive Present
in
indirect discourse accordingly denotes action going on at
the
time, not of the quotation of the words, but of the original
utterance
of them. English usage in indirect discourse is
different,
and from this difference it results that a Greek
Present
Indicative standing in indirect discourse after a verb
of
past time must often be rendered by a verb of past time.
These
cases, however, involve no special use of the Greek
tense,
and should not be confused with those of the Historical
Present.
Cf. 351-356.
20. PERIPHRASTIC FORM OF THE PRESENT. One of the
clearly
marked peculiarities of the Greek of the New Testa-
ment
is the frequency with which periphrastic forms composed
of
a Present or Perfect Participle (Luke
tional
in its use of the Aorist Participle;
cf. Ev. Pet. 23),
and
the Present, Imperfect, or Future Indicative, or the
Present
Subjunctive, Imperative, Infinitive, and even parti-
ciple,
of the verb ei]mi< (rarely also u[pa<rxw), are used instead
of
the usual simple forms. Cf. 431, and see the full dis-
cussion
with examples in B. pp. 308-313, and
the list (not
quite
complete) in S. pp. 131ff.
Instances of the periphrastic Present Indicative
are, how-
ever,
few. The clear instances belong under the head of the
General
Present.
Matt.
27:33; ei]j to<pon lego<menon Golgoqa<, o! e]stin
Krani<ou To<poj
lego<menoj, unto a place called
Skull. See also Matt. l:23;
Mark 5:41; 2 Cor.
12
THE
TENSES.
THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE.
21. The Progressive Imperfect. The Imperfect is
used
of action in progress in past time. HA.
829;
G. 1250, 2.
Mark
rich were
casting in much.
Luke
1:66; kai> ge>r xei>r kuri<ou h#n met ] au]tou?, for the hand of the Lord
was with
him.
John
22. The statement respecting
the translation of the Pro-
gressive
Present (cf. 10), applies to the Imperfect also.
Notice
the third example above, and see also Luke 2:51,
his mother kept [dieth<rei] all these things in her heart; in Luke
24:32,
A. V., did not our heart burn within us,
is better than
R.
V., was not our heart burning within us.
Though the verb
is
a periphrastic Imperfect, kaiome<nh h#n, the English form
did burn sufficiently suggests
action in progress to render it
adequately.
23. THE CONATIVE
IMPERFECT. The Progressive Imperfect
is
sometimes used of action attempted, but not accomplished.
Cf.
11. HA. 832; G.1255.
Matt.
See
also Luke
lassen; 26:11, h]na<gkazon.
24. The Imperfect of Repeated Action. The Imper-
fect
is used of customary or repeated action in past time.
HA. 830; G. 1253, 2
Acts
3:2; o!n e]ti<qoun
kaq ] h[me<ran pro>j th>n
qu<ran tou? i[erou? , whom they
used to
lay daily at the gate of the temple.
THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE 13
25. For the use of the
Imperfect, Aorist, or Pluperfect in
a
condition contrary to fact, or its apodosis, see 248, 249.
26. The Imperfect and
Aorist with a@n are used in classical
Greek
to denote a customary past action taking place under
certain
circumstances. In the New Testament this usage
never
occurs in principal clauses. The use of the Imperfect
and
Aorist with a@n in conditional relative clauses is possibly
a
remnant of the usage. Cf. 315.
27. The Imperfect and
Aorist are used in a clause express-
ing
an unattained wish having reference to the present or past.
The
Imperfect denotes action in progress. The Aorist repre-
sents
the action indefinitely as a simple event. Either tense
may
refer to either present or past time. All the New Testa-
ment
instances seem to refer to present time.
Rev.
3:15; o@felon yuxro>j h#j h} zesto<j, I would that thou wert cold
or hot. See also 1 Cor. 4:8
(Aor.); 2 Cor. 11:1 (Imperf.).
REM. 1. In classical Greek unattainable wishes
are expressed by ei@qe
or
ei] ga<r with the Indicative (HA.
871; G. 1511) or w@felon with the
Infinitive.
In Callimachus, 260 B.C., w@felon is found with the
Indicative
(L.
& S., o]fei<lw II. 3. fin.). In
the New Testament ei] ga<r (in this
sense)
and ei@qe
do not occur, but o@felon, shortened form of w@felon, is
used
(as an uninflected particle) with the Imperfect and Aorist Indica-
tive.
WM. p. 377; WT. p. 301, N. 2.
REM. 2. In Gal.
is
probably not conceived of as unattainable.
28. When an Imperfect
refers to an action not separated
from the time of speaking by a recognized
interval, it is
best
translated into English by the Perfect, using preferably
the
progressive form, unless the verb itself suggests action
in
progress.
14
THE TENSES.
I
John 2:7; h{n ei@xete a]p ] a]rxh?j, which ye
have had from the beginning.
See also Luke
in Theological Monthly, IV. 42, who also quotes
examples from clas-
sical authors). Cf. 52.
29. When an action denoted
by an Imperfect evidently pre-
ceded
an event already mentioned, such Imperfect is sometimes
best
translated into English by the Pluperfect. From the
point
of view of Greek, however, this, like the preceding
usage,
is an ordinary Progressive Imperfect or Imperfect of
Repeated
Action. Cf. 52.
Matt.
for John
had been saying to him, It is not lawful for you to have her.
See also Luke 8:27; Acts 9:39.
30. The Imperfect of verbs
denoting obligation or possi-
bility,
when used to affirm that a certain thing should or
could
have been done, i.e. was required or possible under the
circumstances
related, is a true affirmative Imperfect. It is
incorrect
in this case to speak of an omitted a@n, since though
it
is frequently the case that the necessary or possible deed
did
not take place, the past necessity or possibility was actual,
not
hypothetical or "contrary to fact." Here belong Matt.
2:3,
etc.
The Imperfect is also used of a past necessity
or obligation
when
the necessary deed did take place. Here also, of course,
the
Imperfect has its usual force. Luke
John
4:4; Acts 1:16; 17:3.
31. Buttmann, pp. 216 f.,
225 f., describes correctly the class of cases
in
which the past obligation or possibility was actual, but in which the
required
or possible deed did not take place, but wrongly includes in
his
list several passages in which not only the fact but the obligation
or
ability is hypothetical. Such are John 9:33; 1 Cor. 5:10; Heb. 9:26,
which
are to be explained in accordance with 249. The distinction
THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE. 15
between
these two classes of cases is not always easily marked in English
translation,
since the English forms could, should,
etc., are used both
for
actual and for hypothetical obligation or ability. Cf. He could have
gone, if he had been
well,
and He could have gone, but did not wish
to go.
32. Through a dimming of
the distinction between the
ideas
of present and past obligation (which has occurred also
in
English in the case of the word ought),
the Imperfect with-
out
a@n
is sometimes used to express a present obligation. The
Infinitive
after such an Imperfect is always in the Present
tense.
In accordance with this usage we are probably to ex-
plain
Acts 22:22; Eph. 5:4; Col. 3:18; cf. Ltft.
on
loc. cit. and G.MT. 416.
On these several uses of the Imperfect of verbs
of obliga-
tion,
etc., see G.MT. 413-423.
33. The Imperfect of verbs
of wishing, without a@n, is best
explained
as a true Progressive Imperfect, describing a desire
which
the speaker for a time felt, without affirming that he
actually
cherishes it at the time of his present utterance.
This
is especially clear in Philem. 13, 14, where the apostle
states
in one clause what his desire--his personal prefer-
ence--was
(e]boulo<mhn), and in the next his actual decision
(h]qe<lhsa), as over against his
preference. The reason for
describing
the desire as past is not always, however, that
it
has been put aside. Failure to realize the desire, or the
perception
that it cannot be realized, or reluctance to express
a
positive and deliberate choice may lead the speaker to use
the
Imperfect rather than the Present. Similarly we some-
times
say in colloquial English, I was wishing
that such a
thing might happen, or even more commonly,
I have sometimes
wished. Nearly the same
meaning may be conveyed in Eng-
lish
by the more usual potential form, I
should like, I would
16
THE
TENSES.
that, or I could wish. In Acts 25:22 the use of
the Imperfect
e]boulo<mhn rather than a Present
softens the request for polite-
ness'
sake, and may well be rendered I should
like. In Gal.
that
leads to the use of the Imperfect, and h@qelon parei?nai
may
be rendered, I would that I were present.
In Rom. 9:3
hu]xo<mhn may have been chosen
because the apostle shrank
from
expressing a deliberate choice in regard to so solemn
a
matter, or because he thought of it as beyond the control
or
influence of his wish. I could pray
expresses the meaning
with
approximate accuracy. In all these cases, however, what
is
strictly stated in the Greek is merely the past existence of a
state
of desire; the context alone implies what the present
state
of mind is. Cf. G.MT. 425.
34. PERIPHRASTIC FORM OF
THE IMPERFECT. Periphras-
tic
Imperfects, formed by adding a Present Participle to the
Imperfect
of the verb ei]mi<, are frequent in the New Testament,
especially
in the historical books. The large majority of
these
forms denote continued action.
Mark
before
them.
So also Luke
Mark
Luke
THE AORIST
INDICATIVE.
35. The constant
characteristic of the Aorist tense in all
of
its moods, including the participle, is that it represents the
action
denoted by it indefinitely; i.e.
simply as an event,
neither
on the one hand picturing it in progress, nor on the
other
affirming the existence of its result. The name indefi-
nite as thus understood is
therefore applicable to the tense in
all
of its uses.
THE AORIST INDICATIVE 17
As respects the point of view from which the
action is
looked
at, however, we may distinguish three functions of the
tense
common to all of its moods.
First, it may be used to describe an action or
event in its
entirety.
This use of the tense, since it is by far the most
frequent,
may be called by pre-eminence the Indefinite Aorist.
In
the Indicative it may be called the Historical Aorist. The
Aorist
of any verb may be used in this sense; thus ei]
to say; diakonh?sai, to serve.
Secondly, it may be used to denote the inception
of a
state.
The Aorist thus used may be called the Inceptive
Aorist.
It belongs to verbs which in the Present and Imper-
fect
denote the continuance of a state; thus sig%?n, to be silent;
sigh?sai, to
become silent.
Thirdly, it may be used to denote the success of
an effort.
The
Aorist thus used may be called the Resultative Aorist.
It
belongs to verbs which in the Present and Imperfect denote
effort
or attempt; thus kwlu<ein, to hinder, obstruct; kwlu?sai, to
prevent.
The genetic relation of these three functions of
the Aorist
tense
has not been satisfactorily defined. In the Greek, both of
the
classical and the New Testament periods, however, they ap-
pear
side by side as co-ordinate uses. Br.159;
REM. Respecting the force of the Indefinite
Aorist, compare Brug-
mann's
statement concerning the Aorist forms: "Am haufigsten wurden
diese
Formen so gebraucht, dass man sich die Handlung in einen unge-
teilten
Denkakt ganz und vollstandig, in sich abgeschlossen, absolut vor-
stellen
sollte. Das Factum wurde einfach constatiert ohne Rucksicht
auf
Zeitdauer."
36. In addition to these
uses which belong to the Aorist in
all
its moods, the Aorist Indicative has three uses, instances
of
which are comparatively infrequent. These are the Gnomic
Aorist,
the Epistolary Aorist, and the Dramatic Aorist.
18
THE
TENSES.
The Aorist for the Perfect and the Aorist for
the Pluper-
fect
are, as explained below (52), not distinct functions of the
Aorist,
but merely special cases of the Historical, Inceptive,
or
Resultative Aorist.
37. The distinction between
the Indefinite, the Inceptive,
and
the Resultative functions of the Aorist is often ignored,
or
its legitimacy denied. It is true that there are cases in
which
it is not possible to decide certainly whether a given
verb
refers to the inception of an action only, or to its entire
extent,
and others in which there is a similar difficulty in
deciding
whether the reference is to the action as a whole or
to
its result only. It is true also that the genetic relation of
these
three uses of the tense is not a matter of entire cer-
tainty,
and that it is possible that, historically speaking, they
are
but varying types of one usage. Especially must it be
regarded
as doubtful whether the Resultative Aorist is any-
thing
else than the Indefinite Aorist of verbs denoting effort.
The
matter of importance to the interpreter, however, is
that,
whatever the genesis of the fact, of the Aorists of the
New
Testament some denote a past act in its undivided
entirety,
others denote merely or chiefly the inception of an
action,
and others still affirm as a past fact the accomplish-
ment
of an act attempted. These distinctions,
which from the
exegetical
point of view it is often Important to mark, are
conveniently
indicated by the terms indefinite,
inceptive, and
resultative. With reference to the
validity of this distinction,
see
Br. 159.
The Inceptive Aorist is illustrated in Acts
they had become silent [meta>
to> sigh?sai]
James answered. It
is
evident that the Infinitive must refer to the becoming
silent,
not to the whole period of silence, since in the latter
case
James must have been silent while the others were silent,
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 19
and
have begun to speak when their silence had ended. In
2
Cor. 8:9, we must read not being rich he
was poor, but being
rich he became poor; e]ptw<xeusen is manifestly
inceptive. So
also
in Luke
went a day's journey, it was not the holding
of the opinion that
he
was in the company that preceded the day's journey, but
the
forming of it, and the participle nomi<santej is inceptive.
Contrast
Acts
Illustrations of the resultative sense are less
numerous and
less
clear. In Acts 7:36, however, this man
led them forth,
having wrought wonders
and signs in
and in the wilderness
forty years,
the verb e]ch<gagen seems to
refer
only to the result, since the signs wrought in the Red
Sea
and the wilderness would otherwise have been represented
as
accompanying the bringing out, and instead of poih<saj we
should
have had poiw?n.
See also 42.1
38. The Historical Aorist. The Aorist Indicative is
most
frequently used to express a past event viewed in its
entirety,
simply as an event or a single fact. It has no
reference
to the progress of the event, or to any existing
result
of it. HA. 836; G. 1250, 5.
John
unto his
own and they that were his own received him not.
39. Since any past event
without reference to its duration
or
complexity may be conceived of as a single fact, the His-
torical
Aorist may be used to describe
(a) A momentary action.
Acts
5:5; e]ce<yucen, he gave
up the ghost.
Matt.
8:3; kai> e]ktei<naj th>n xei?ra h!yato au]tou?, and having stretched
forth his
hand he touched him.
1 Cf. Mart. Polyc. 8 : 2, 3, where both e@peiqon, were persuading, and
a]potuxo<ntej tou?
20
THE
TENSES.
(b) An extended act or state, however prolonged
in time, if
viewed
as constituting a single fact without reference to its
progress.
Acts
28:30; e]ne<meinen de> dieti<an o!lhn e]n i]di<&
misqw<mati,
and he abode
two whole
years in his own hired dwelling.
Eph.
2:4; dia> th>n pollh>n a]ga<phn au]tou? h{n h]ga<phsen h[ma?j, because
of his
great love wherewith he loved us.
(c) A series or aggregate of acts viewed as
constituting a
single
fact.
Matt.
2
Cor.
40. These three uses of the Historical Aorist
may for con-
venience
be designated as the Momentary Aorist, the Compre-
hensive
Aorist, and the Collective Aorist. But it should be
clearly
observed that these terms do not mark distinctions in
the
functions of the tense. An Historical Aorist, whatever the
nature
of the fact affirmed, affirms it simply as a past fact.
The
writer may or may not have in mind that the act was
single
and momentary, or extended, or a series of acts, but the
tense
does not express or suggest the distinction. The pur-
pose
of the subdivision into momentary, comprehensive, and
collective
is not to define the force of the tense-form, but to
discriminate
more precisely the nature of the facts to which
it
is applied as shown by the context or the circumstances.
Cf.
G.MT. 56.
REM. The term Historical Aorist is applied to the use of the Aorist
here
described only by pre-eminence. In strictness the Inceptive and
Resultative
Aorists are also Historical. Compare what is said concerning
the
term Indefinite under 35.
41. The Inceptive Aorist. The Aorist of a verb whose
Present
denotes a state or condition, commonly denotes
the
beginning of that state. HA. 841; G. 1260.
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 21
2
Cor. 8:9; di ] u[ma?j
e]ptw<xeusen plou<sioj w@n, though
he was rich, for
your sakes
he became poor.
See also Luke 15:32; John 4:52;
Acts 7:60;
REM. The Aorist of such verbs is not, however,
necessarily inceptive.
The
same form may be in one sentence inceptive and in another historical
Cf.
Luke
historical,
in the latter probably inceptive.
42. The Resultative Aorist. The Aorist of a verb
whose
Present implies effort or intention, commonly de-
notes
the success of the effort. Cf. 11, 23.
Acts
27:43; o[ de> e[katonta<rxhj . . .
e]kw<lusen au]tou>j tou? boulh<matoj,
but the
centurion. . . prevented them from their purpose. See also
Matt. 27:20; Acts 7:36.
43. The
Gnomic Aorist.
The Aorist is used in prov-
erbs
and comparisons where the English commonly uses a
General
Present. HA. 840; G. 1292; G. MT. 154-161;
B. pp. 201 ff.; WM. pp. 346 f.; WT. p. 277; Br. 160.
1
Pet.
eth and
the flower falleth.
See also Luke 7:35; John 15:6; Jas.
1:11, 24.
REM. Winer's contention (WT. p. 277; WM. p. 346)
that the
Gnomic
Aorist does not occur in the New Testament does not seem
defensible.
The passages cited above are entirely similar to the classical
examples
of this ancient and well-established idiom.
44. The Epistolary Aorist. The writer of a letter
sometimes
puts himself in the place of his reader and de-
scribes
as past that which is to himself present, but which
will
be past to his reader. HA. 838.
Eph.
this very
purpose.
See also Acts 23:30; 1 Cor. 5:11; Phil. 2:28;
Col. 4:8; Philem. 11.
22
THE
TENSES.
45. The
Dramatic Aorist.
The Aorist Indicative is
sometimes
used of a state of mind just reached, or of an
act
expressive of it. The effect is to give to the statement
greater
vividness than is given by the more usual Present.
HA. 842; G.MT. 60; K. 386, 9;
Luke
16:4; e@gnwn ti< poih<sw, I know
[lit. I knew, or I perceived] what
I shall do.
REM. This usage is in classical Greek mainly
poetical and is found
chiefly
in dialogue. It is sometimes called "Aoristus tragicus." Brug-
mann
thus describes it: "Nicht selten wurde der Aorist von dem
gebraucht,
was soeben eingetreten ist, besonders von einer Stimmung,
die
soeben uber einen gekommen ist, oder von einem Urteil, das man
sich
soeben gebildet hat." See numerous examples in K. 386, 9.
46. THE AORIST FOR THE
(English) PERFECT. The Aorist
is
frequently used in Greek where the English idiom requires
a
Perfect. G.MT. 58; H.A. 837; B. pp. 197, 198.
Lk19:9;
sh<meron swthri<a t&, oi@k& tou<t&
e]ge<neto,
to-day is salvation
come to
this house.
Matt.
said to
them of old time.
Ph.
in
whatsoever state I am therein to be content. See also under 52.
47. The Aorist Indicative
of a few verbs is used in the New
Testament
to denote a present state, the result of a past act,
hence
with the proper force of a Greek Perfect. Cf. 75, 86.
So
the Aorists a]pe<qanon (cf. Mark
see
John
possibly
e@gnwn
(John
Aorists
may also be used as simple historical Aorists.
48. THE AORIST FOR THE (English) PLUPERFECT. The
Aorist
Indicative is frequently used in narrative passages of
a
past event which precedes another past event mentioned
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 23
or
implied in the context. In English it is common in such
a
case to indicate the real. order of the events by the use
of
a Pluperfect for the earlier event. Cf. 52, 53. H.A. 4. 837;
G.MT. 58; B. pp. 199 f.
John
therefore
Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished.
Matt.
14:3; o[ ga>r
[Hr&<dhj krath<saj to>n
]Iwa<nhn e@dhsen, for Herod
having laid hold on John had bound him. See also
Matt. 27:31;
Mark
8:14; Luke 8:27; John
REM. It has been much disputed whether a]pe<steilen in John
is
to be assigned to this head. The valid objection to this is not in any
inappropriateness
of the Aorist tense to express an event antecedent to
one
already mentioned)--the Aorist is the only form that can be used if
the
event is thought of simply as an event (cf. Mey.
ad loc., contra)--
but
in the presence of ou#n, which is, in John especially, so constantly
continuative,
and in the absence of any intimation in the context that
the
events are related out of their chronological order.
49. From the general
principles of indirect discourse in
English
and in Greek it results that an Aorist Indicative in
indirect
discourse after a verb of past time must usually be
rendered
into English by a Pluperfect. Cf. 353. These cases
form
a class entirely distinct from those that are included
above
under the term Aorist for the English Pluperfect.
50. Both the Aorist and the
Perfect are sometimes used
proleptically,
but this is rather a rhetorical figure than a gram-
matical
idiom. WM. pp. 341, 345, 347; WT. pp. 273, 277, 278.
1
Cor.
marry,
thou hast not sinned.
See also John 15:8; Jas. 2:10.
51. For the Aorist in a
condition contrary to fact, see 248.
For
the Aorist expressing an unattained wish, see 27.
52. ENGLISH EQUIVALENTS OF
THE GREEK AORIST INDIC-
ATIVE.
It should be observed that the Aorist for the Perfect
and
the Aorist for the Pluperfect are not variations from the
24
THE
TENSES.
normal
use of the Greek Aorist. Viewed strictly from the
point
of view of Greek Grammar, these Aorists are simply
Historical,
Inceptive, or Resultative Aorists. The necessity for
mentioning
them arises merely from the difference between
the
English and the Greek idiom.
The Greek Aorist corresponds to the English
simple Past
(or
Imperfect or Preterite, loved, heard,
etc.) more nearly than
to
any other English tense. But it is not the precise equiva-
lent
of the English Past; nor is the Greek Perfect the precise
equivalent
of the English Perfect; nor the Greek Pluperfect
of
the English Pluperfect. This will appear distinctly if we
place
side by side the definitions of the tenses which in gen-
eral
correspond in the two languages.
The English Perfect is used The
Greek Perfect is used
of
any past action between to
represent an action as
which
and the time of speak- standing
complete, i.e. as hav-
ing
the speaker does not in- ing
an existing result, at the
tend
distinctly to interpose an time
of speaking.
interval.1
The English Pluperfect is The Greek Pluperfect is
used
to mark the fact that the used
to represent an action as
event
expressed by it preceded standing
complete, i.e. as hav-
another
past event indicated by ing
an existing result, at a
the
context, and this whether point
of past time indicated
the
earlier event is thought of by
the context.
as
completed at the time of
the
later event, or only indefi-
nitely
as a simple occurrence
preceding
the later event!
1 The English Perfect and Pluperfect by
their auxiliaries have and had
distinctly
suggest completed action in the proper sense, viz. the posses-
sion
of a thing in the condition indicated by the participle, and substan-
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 25
The
English Past is used of The Greek Aorist is used of
any
past action between which any
past event which is con-
and
the moment of speaking ceived
of simply as an event
an
interval is thought of as (or
as entered upon, or as ac-
existing.
It affirms nothing complished),
regardless alike
respecting
existing result. of
the existence or non-exist-
ence of an interval
between
itself and the moment of
speaking, and of the
question
whether it precedes or
not
some other past action.
It
affirms nothing
respecting ex-
isting result.
It
is evident from this comparison that the English Perfect
has
a larger range of use than the Greek Perfect.
tially
this is the meaning often conveyed by these tenses. Thus, I have
learned my lesson, differs but little in
meaning from I have my lesson
learned. But this is by no means
the only use which may be made of
these
tenses in modern English. They have, in fact, ceased to be Perfect
tenses
in any proper sense of that word. Compare, e.g., the Pasts and
Perfects
in the following examples: The army
arrived. The army has
arrived. Many men fought
for their country. Many men have fought
for their country. He
often visited
Only
in the first example is existing result suggested by the Perfect tense.
In
each pair the distinguishing mark between the two sentences is that
while
the Perfect tense places the event in the past time without defining
whether
or not an interval has elapsed since the event, the Past tense
places
it in the past time and suggests an interval.
Similarly, the English Pluperfect affirms only
the antecedence of its
event
to the other past event, leaving it to the context or the nature of
the
fact to show whether at the past time referred to there were existing
results
or not. Thus in the sentence, I showed
him the work which I had
done, it is implied that the
results of the doing remained at the time of
the
showing. But in the sentence, He did not
recognize the persons whom
he had previously seen, it is not implied that
any result of the seeing
remained
at the time of the non-recognition.
26
THE
TENSES.
Thus a past event between which and the time of
speaking
no
interval is distinctly thought of may be expressed by the
English
Perfect, whether the result of the event is thought of
as
existing or not; but it can be expressed by the Greek Per-
fect
only in case such result is thought of. So also the Eng-
lish
Pluperfect has a wider range than the Greek Pluperfect.
For
while the Greek can use its Pluperfect for an event
which
preceded another past event only in case the result
of
the earlier event is thought of as existing at the time
of
the later event, the English freely uses its Pluperfect
for
all such doubly past events, without reference to the
existence
of the result of the earlier event at the time of
the
later one.
On the other hand, the Greek Aorist has a wider
range
than
the English Past, since it performs precisely those func-
tions
which the Greek Perfect and Pluperfect refuse, but
which
in modern English are performed not by the Past but
by
the Perfect and Pluperfect. The Greek Aorist, therefore,
in
its ordinary use not only covers the ground of the English
Past,
but overlaps in part upon that of the English Perfect
and
Pluperfect. Hence arise the so-called Aorist for Perfect
and
Aorist for Pluperfect.
If the attempt be made to define more exactly
the extent
of
this overlapping, it will appear that a simple past event
which
is conceived of without reference to an existing result,
and
between which and the time of speaking the speaker does
not
wish distinctly to suggest an interval,--the interval may
be
ever so long, in fact,--will be expressed in Greek by
the
Aorist, because the result is not thought of, and in Eng-
lish
by the Perfect, because the interval is not thought of.
Cases
of this kind arise, e.g., when the
event is said to con-
tinue
up to the time of speaking, so that there is actually no
interval
[Matt. 27:8; dio> e]klh<qh o[ a]gro>j
e]kei?noj ]Agro>j Ai!matoj
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 27
e!wj th?j sh<meron, therefore that field has been called Field of Blood
until this day. See also Matt. 28:15;
John
event
is so recent as to make the thought of an interval seem
unnatural
[Luke
strange things to-day. See also Mark
. . . e]ge<nesqe]; or when the time of
the event is entirely
indefinite
[Matt. 19:4; ou]k a]ne<gnwte, have ye not read? See
also
Rev. 11:12; exx. are frequent in the New Testament];
or
when the verb refers to a series of events which extends
approximately
or quite to the time of speaking [Matt.
h]kou<sate o!ti e]rre<qh toi?j
a]rxai<oij,
ye have heard that it was said
to the ancients; the reference is
doubtless to the frequent
occasions
on which they had heard such teachings in the
synagogue.
See also 1 Esdr. 4 : 26, 27].
Instances of the Greek Aorist for the English
Pluperfect
arise
when a past event which is conceived of simply as an
event
without reference to existing result is mentioned out
of
its chronological order, or is expressed in a subordinate
clause.
The Greek employs the Aorist, leaving the context
to
suggest the order; the English usually suggests the order
by
the use of a Pluperfect. See exx. under 48. Of. Beet, The
Greek
Aorist as used in the New Testament, in Expositor,
XI.
191-201,
296-308, 312-385;
English
of the Greek Aorist and Perfect, in Theological
Monthly, IV. 33-41,162-180.
53. In many cases in which
the Greek Aorist is used of
an
event antecedent to another past event already referred to,
English
idiom permits a simple Past. A Pluperfect is strictly
required
only when the precedence in time is somewhat promi-
nent.
The Revisers of 1881 have used the Pluperfect spar-
ingly
in such cases. It might better have been used also in
Matt.
9:25; Mark 8:14; John 12:18 (had heard).
28
THE TESES.
54. An Aorist which is
equivalent to an English Perfect
or
Pluperfect may be either an historical,
or an inceptive, or
a
Resultative Aorist. If historical, it
may be either momentary,
comprehensive, or collective.
In Luke
Aorists
which may be properly rendered by the English Perfect; probably
also
e]basi<leusaj, in Rev. 11:17, should be rendered, thou hast become
king.
In Rom.
of
the evil deeds of men, of which the apostle has been speaking in the
preceding
paragraphs (
Aorist.
But since that series of evil deeds extends even to the moment
of
speaking, as is indeed directly affirmed in the pa<ntej, it is impos-
sible
to think of an interval between the fact stated and this statement
of
it. It must therefore be expressed in English by the Perfect tense, and
be
classed with Matt. 5:21 as a collective Aorist for (English) Perfect.
Of
similar force is the same form in Rom. 2:12. From the point of view
from
which the apostle is speaking, the sin of each offender is simply a
past
fact, and the sin of all a series or aggregate of facts together consti-
tuting
a past fact. But inasmuch as this series is not separated from the
time
of speaking, we must, as in
translation.
This is upon the supposition that the verb h!marton takes its
point
of view from the time of speaking, and the apostle accordingly
speaks
here only of sin then past, leaving it to be inferred that the same
principle
would apply to subsequent sin. It is possible, however, that
by
a sort of prolepsis h!marton is uttered from the point of view of the
future
judgment [kriqh<sontai], and refers to all sin that will then be past.
In
this case the Future Perfect, shall have sinned, may be used in trans-
lation,
or again the Perfect, common in subordinate clauses in English as
an
abbreviation of the Future Perfect. Whether the same form in
upon
whether it is, like the other cases, a collective Aorist, representing
a
series of acts between which and the time of speaking no interval is
interposed,
or refers to a deed or deeds in the remote past in which the
"all"
in some way participated. So far as the tense-form is concerned
there
is no presumption in favor of one or the other of these inter-
pretations,
both uses of the tense being equally legitimate. The nature
of
the argument or the author's thought, as learned from sources
outside
the sentence itself, must furnish the main evidence by which
to
decide.
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 29
55. The Aorist eu]do<khsa in Matt.
reference
to a specific event as its basis. I was well pleased with thee,
e.g. for receiving baptism.
If all the instances were in connection with the
baptism,
this would be the most natural explanation. But for those that
occur
in connection with the account of the transfiguration this explana-
tion
fails, and is probably therefore not the true explanation of any of the
instances.
(b) as a comprehensive Historical Aorist covering the period
of
Christ's preincarnate existence. Cf. John 17:5, 24; see W. N. Clarke,
Com.
on Mark 1:11. If the passages were in the fourth gospel, and
especially
if they contained some such phrase as pro> katabolh?j
ko<smou,
this
explanation would have much in its favor. The absence of such
limiting
phrase, and the fact that the passages are in the synoptic gospels
are
opposed to this explanation. (c) as a comprehensive Historical Aorist,
having
the force of an English Perfect, and referring to the period of
Christ's
earthly existence up to the time of speaking. But against this
is
the absence of any adverbial phrase meaning up
to this time, which
usually
accompanies an Aorist verb used in this sense. Cf. 18 and 52.
(d)
as an Aorist which has by usage come to have the meaning which is
strictly
appropriate to the Perfect, I became well
pleased with thee, and
I am [accordingly] well
pleased with thee.
Cf. 47. There are a few pas-
sages
of the Septuagint that seem at first sight to favor this explanation.
See
Ps. 101:15; Jer. 2:19; Mal. 2:17. Cf. also Matt. 12:18; Luke 12:32.
The
force of this evidence is, however, greatly diminished by the fact
that
all these instances are capable of being explained without resort to so
unusual
a use of the Aorist, that both in the Septuagint and in the New
Testament
there is in use a regular Present form of this verb, and that
the
Aorist in the majority of cases clearly denotes past time. (e) as an
Inceptive
Aorist referring to some indefinite, imagined point of past time
at
which God is represented as becoming well pleased with Jesus. But
since
this point is not thought of as definitely fixed, English idiom requires
a
Perfect tense. Cf. 52 (p. 27), 54. It may be described, therefore, as an
Inceptive
Aorist equivalent to an English Perfect, and may be rendered,
I have become well
pleased.
This, however, can only be a vivid way of
saying,
I am well pleased. If then this view
is correct, the rendering
of
the English versions is a free but substantially correct paraphrase.
A
true Perfect would affirm the present state of pleasure and imply the
past
becoming pleased. The Aorist affirms the becoming pleased and
leaves
the present pleasure to be suggested. This explanation, therefore,
differs
from the preceding (d) in that it does not suppose the Aorist
of
this verb to have acquired the power of expressing an existing result,
but
judges the existing result to be only suggested by the affirmation
30
THE
TENSES.
of
the past fact. This is rhetorical figure, on the way to become gram-
matical
idiom, but not yet become such. Manifestly similar is the use
of
prosede<cato in Isa. 42:1, and of eu]do<khsen in Matt. 12:18. Indeed,
if
Matt.
passages
were probably affected in form by this current rendering of the
Isaiah
passage. Similar also are e]ka<qisan in Matt. 23:2, and e@maqon in
Phil.
4:11. In neither case is there any clearly established usage of the
Aorist
for Greek perfect; in neither is there apparent any reference
to
a definite point of past time; in both the real fact intended to be
suggested
is the present state.
56. THE DISTINCTION
BETWEEN THE AORIST AND THE
IMPERFECT.
The difference between an Historical Aorist
and
an Imperfect of action in progress or repeated being one
not
of the nature of the fact but of the speaker's conception
of
the fact, it is evident that the same fact may be expressed
by
either tense or by both. This is illustrated in Mark 12:41
and
44, where, with strict appropriateness in both cases, Mark
writes
in v. 41, polloi> plou<sioi e@ballon polla<, and in v. 44
records
Jesus as stating the same fact in the words pa<ntej . . .
e@balon. The former describes the scene in
progress, the latter
merely
states the fact.
57. From the nature of the
distinction between the Imper-
fect
and Aorist, it also results that the difference in thought
represented
by the choice of one form rather than the other
is
sometimes almost imperceptible. Cf., e.g.,
Mark 3:7 and
tenses
almost or quite to the exclusion of the other. The
form
e@legon is used in classical Greek without emphasis on
the
thought of the saying as in progress or repeated, and in the
New
Testament the Aorist of this verb does not occur. A dis-
tinction
between the Imperfect e@legon and the Aorist ei#pon is
scarcely
to be drawn in the New Testament. Cf. G.MT.
56,
57,
especially the following: "In all these cases the funda-
mental
distinction of the tenses, which was inherent in the
THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 31
form,
remained; only it happened that either of the two dis-
tinct
forms expressed the meaning which was here needed
equally
well. It must not be thought, from these occasional
examples,
that the Greeks of any period were not fully alive
to
the distinction of the two tenses and could not use it with
skill
and nicety."
This approximation of the Aorist and Imperfect,
it should
be
noted, occurs only in the case of the Historical Aorist (38).
The
Inceptive and Resultative Aorists are clearly distinguished
in
force from the Imperfect.
THE FUTURE INDICATIVE.
58. The
Predictive Future.
The Future Indicative is
most
frequently used to affirm that an action is to take
place
in future time. Since it does not mark the distinc-
tion
between action in progress and action conceived of
indefinitely
without reference to its progress, it may be
either
aoristic or progressive. HA. 843; G. 1250, 6;
G.MT. 63, 65;
59. THE AORISTIC FUTURE
conceives of an action simply
as
an event, and affirms that it will take place in future time.
It
may be indefinite, inceptive, or resultative. As indefinite
it
may be momentary, comprehensive, or collective. Of. 35, 39.
1
Cor.
e]n a]to<m&,
e]n r[ip^? o]fqalmou?,
we shall not all sleep [indefinite com-
prehensive]; or; we shall not all fall asleep [inceptive], but we shall
all be
changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye [indefinite
momentary].
John
ei#pon
u[mi?n e]gw<,
he will teach you all things and bring to
your remem-
brance all
things that I said unto you [indefinite collective].
Luke
shall
reign over the house of Jacob forever [indefinite comprehensive].
Luke
16:31; ou]d ] e]a<n tij
e]k nekrw?n a]nast^? peisqh<sontai, neither
will
they be
persuaded if one rise from the dead [resultative].
32
THE
TENSES.
60. THE PROGRESSIVE FUTURE
affirms that an action will
be
in progress in future time. HA. 843; G. 1250, 6.
Phil.
rejoice,
yea, and will
[continue to] rejoice. See also Rom. 6:2;
Phil. 1:6; Rev. 9:6.
61. It may be doubted
whether any of the distinctions indi-
cated
by the subdivisions of the Predictive Future are justi-
fied
from the point of view of pure grammar. It is probable,
rather,
that the tense in all these cases makes precisely the
same
affirmation respecting the event, viz.
that it will take
place; and that it is the
context only that conveys the dis-
tinctions
referred to. These distinctions, however, are real
distinctions
either of fact or of thought, and such, moreover,
that
the writer must in most cases have had them in mind
when
speaking of the facts. From the exegetical point of
view,
therefore, the distinctions are both justified and neces-
sary,
since they represent differences of thought in the mind
of
the writer to be interpreted. The terms employed above
are
convenient terms to represent these distinctions of thought,
and
it is to the interpreter a matter of secondary importance
whether
the distinction in question is by his writer immedi-
ately
connected with the tense of the verb.
62. Since the Aoristic
Future is less definite respecting
progress
than the Progressive Future, the latter predicting
the
act as continuing, the former making no assertion, it is
evident
that any instance of the Predictive Future not clearly
progressive
must be accounted as aoristic. If the writer did
not
conceive the act or event as continuing, he left it in his
own
mind and for the reader undefined as respects progress,
hence
aoristic. Whether he left it thus undefined in his mind
must
of course be determined, if at all, from the context, there
being
no difference of form between a Progressive and an
THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 33
Aoristic
Future. It should be noticed that it is not enough
to
show that an act will be in fact continued, in order to count
the
verb which predicts it a Progressive Future; it must ap-
pear
that the writer thought of it as continuing. Every
Future
form is therefore by presumption aoristic. It can
be
accounted progressive only on evidence that the writer
thought
of the act as continued.
REM. There is one exception to this principle.
In verbs of effort a
Progressive
Future is naturally like other Progressive forms, a conative
tense.
An Aoristic Future of such a verb is like the Aorist, a resultative
tense.
Since the latter is the larger meaning, the context must give the
evidence
of this larger meaning, and such evidence failing, it cannot be
considered
established that the verb is resultative. The verb in John 12:
32
furnishes an interesting and important illustration. Since the verb
denotes
effort, the Future will naturally be accounted conative if it is
judged
to be progressive, and resultative if it is taken as aoristic. In the
latter
case the meaning will be, I will by my
attraction bring all men to
me. In the former case the
words will mean, I will exert on all men
an
attractive influence.
63. To decide whether a
given Aoristic Future merely pre-
dicts
the fact, or refers to the inception of the action, or has
reference
to it as a thing accomplished, must again be deter-
mined
by the context or the meaning of the word. The dis-
tinction
between the indefinite and the resultative senses will
often
be very difficult to make, and indeed the difference
of
thought will be but slight. Here also it results from the
nature
of the distinction between the indefinite use and the
other
two, inceptive and resultative, that any instance of
the
Aoristic Future not clearly inceptive or resultative must
be
accounted indefinite. In other words, if the writer did not
define
the action to his own mind as inceptive or resultative,
he
left it indefinite, a mere fact.
64. The distinction between
momentary, comprehensive,
and
collective is in respect to the Future tense, as in respect
34
THE
TENSES.
to
the Aorist, a distinction which primarily has reference to
the
facts referred to and only secondarily to the writer's con-
ception
of the facts. There may easily occur instances which
will
defy classification at this point. A writer may predict
an
event not only without at the moment thinking whether
it
is to be a single deed or a series of deeds, a momentary or
an
extended action, but even without knowing. Thus the
sentence,
He will destroy his enemies, may be
uttered by one
who
has confidence that the person referred to will in some
way
destroy his enemies, without at all knowing whether he
will
destroy them one by one, or all at once, and whether by
some
long-continued process, or by one exterminating blow.
In
such cases the verb can only be accounted as an Aoristic
Future,
incapable of further classification.
65. From a different point
of view from that of the above
classification,
the instances of the Predictive Future might be
classified
as (a) assertive, and (b) promissory. The distinc-
tion
between the assertion that an event will take place and
the
promise that it shall take place is difficult to make,
requiring
delicate discrimination, but is often important for
purposes
of interpretation. It is in general not indicated in
Greek,
and its representation in English is complicated by the
varied
uses of the auxiliary verbs shall and
will. In general
it
may be said that in principal clauses shall
is in the first
person
simply assertive, will is promissory;
in the second and
third
person will is assertive, shall is promissory, imperative,
or
solemnly predictive.
R. V. employs shall almost constantly in the second and
third
person, in most cases probably intending it as solemnly
predictive.
Matt.
I say unto
you, he shall by no means lose his reward.
THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 35
Mark
will say.
Luke
22:61; Pri>n a]le<ktora fwnh?sai sh<meron a]parnh<s^ me
tri<j, before
the cock
crow this day, thou shalt deny me thrice. See also Matt. 11:
28, 29;
66. A Predictive Future is
sometimes made emphatically
negative
by the use of the negative ou] mh>, Matt.
35;
Mark
67. The
Imperative Future.
The second person of the
Future
Indicative is often used as an Imperative. HA.
844;
G. 1265.
Jas.
2:8; a]gaph<seij to>n plhsi<on sou w[j seauto<n, thou shalt love thy
neighbor
as thyself.
REM. 1: This idiom as it occurs in the New
Testament shows clearly
the
influence of the Septuagint. It occurs most frequently in prohibi-
tions,
its negative being, as also commonly in classical Greek, not mh< but
ou]. G.MT.
69, 70; B. p. 267; WM. pp.. 396 f.; WT. pp. 315 f.
REM. 2. In Matt. 15:6 the verb timh<sei has the negative ou]
mh<.
Some
interpreters
take this as a Predictive Future, but the thought requires the
Imperative
sense, and in view of the frequent use of ou] mh< with the Future
in
an imperative sense in the Septuagint, and its occasional use in classi-
cal
Greek, the possibility of it can hardly be denied. WM. p. 636 f., n. 4;
G.MT.297.
68. One or two probable
instances of the Imperative Future
in
the third person occur, though perhaps no entirely certain
case.
Matt. 4:4, ou]k
e]p ] a@rt& mo<n& zh<setai o[ a@nqrwpoj
ably
to be so regarded, though the Hebrew of the passage
quoted
(Deut. 8:3) is apparently Gnomic rather than Imper-
ative.
On Matt. 15:6, see 67, Rem. 2. See also Matt. 20:
26,
27.
36
THE
TENSES.
69. The
Gnomic Future.
The Future Indicative may
be
used to state what will customarily happen when occa-
sion
offers.
Rom.
5:7; mo<lij ga>r u[pe>r dikai<ou tij a]poqanei?tai, for scarcely for a
righteous
man will one die.
See also Gen. 44:15;
ti<sei. Observe the Gnomic
Presents both before and after.
70. The
Deliberative Future.
The Future Indicative
is
sometimes used in questions of deliberation, asking not
what
will happen, but what can or ought to be done.
Such
questions may be real questions asking information,
or
rhetorical questions taking the place of a direct asser-
tion.
Cf. 169.
Luke
John
6:68; ku<rie, pro>j ti<na a]peleuso<meqa, Lord, to whom shall we go?
71. PERIPHRASTIC FORM: OF
THE FUTURE. A Future tense
composed
of a Present Participle and the Future of the verb
ei]mi< is found occasionally in the New
Testament. The force
is
that of a Progressive Future, with the thought of continu-
ance
or customariness somewhat emphasized.
Luke
catcher of
men.
Luke
to] be
trodden under foot.
72. Me<llw with the Infinitive is
also used with a force
akin
to that of the Future Indicative. It is usually employed
of
an action which one intends to do, or of that which is
certain,
destined to take place.
Matt.
2:13; me<llei
ga>r [Hr&<dhj zhtei?n to>
paidi<on tou? a]pole<sai au]to<,
for Herod will seek the young child to destroy it.
Luke
for the
Son of man is to be delivered up into the hands of
men. See also Matt.
THE PERFECT INDICATIVE. 37
73. By the use of the
Imperfect of me<llw with the Infinitive
it
is affirmed that at a past point of time an action was about
to
take place or was intended or destined to occur.
John
pisteu<santej
ei]j au]to<n,
but this spake he of the Spirit which
they
that believed
on him were to receive. See also Luke 7:2; John 6:71.
THE PERFECT INDICATIVE.
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. HA. 847; G. 1250, 3.
Acts
filled
Romans
5:5; o!ti h[ a]ga<ph
tou? qeou? e]kke<xutai e]n tai?j kardi<aij h[mw?n,
because
the love of God has been poured forth in our hearts.
2
Tim. 4:7; to>n kalo>n a]gw?na h]gw<nismai, to>n dro<mon
tete<leka, th>n
pi<stin
teth<rhka, I have fought the good fight, I have finished
the
course, I
have kept the faith.
REM. On the use of the term complete as a
grammatical term, see
85.
On the distinction between the Perfect and the Aorist, see 86.
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. HA. 849; G.1263.
Matt.
27:43; pe<poiqen e]pi> to>n qeo<n, he trusteth on God.
1
Cor. 11:2; e]painw? de> u[ma?j, o!ti pa<nta mou? me<mnhsqe, now praise you
that ye
remember me in all things.
Luke
24:46; ou!twj ge<graptai, thus it
is written, i.e. stands written.
See also Rev. 19:13.
38
THE TENSES.
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.
77. THE INTENSIVE PERFECT.
The Perfect is sometimes
used
in classical Greek as an emphatic or intensive Present.
It
is possible that under this head should be placed certain
Perfects
of the New Testament more commonly assigned to
one
of the preceding uses. Thus pe<poiqa a practically expresses
the
thought of
a
stronger way of saying pisteu<w. John 6:69; pepisteu<kamen
kai> e]gnw<kamen o!ti su> ei#
o[ a!gioj tou? qeou?,
we have believed and know
that thou art the Holy
One of God.
See also 2 Cor. 1:10.
Whether
this usage is in the New Testament a survival of the
ancient
intensive use of the Perfect, regarded by some gram-
marians
as an original function of the tense (Del.
IV. 94 ff.,
Br. 162), or a later development
from the Perfect of com-
pleted
action, affirming the present existence of the result of
a
past act, need not, for the purpose of the interpreter, be
decided.
78. Of the Historical
Perfect in the sense of a Perfect
which
expresses a past completed action, the result of which
the
speaker conceives himself to be witnessing (as in the case
of
the Historical Present he conceives himself to be witness-
ing
the action itself), there is no certain New Testament
instance.
Possible instances are Matt. 13: 46; Luke 9:36;
2
Cor. 12:17; Jas. l:24. Cf. Br. 162.
This idiom is perhaps
rather
rhetorical than strictly grammatical.
THE PERFECT INDICATIVE 39
Ke<kragen in John
vividly
conceived of as if present to the speaker. But since
the
Perfect of the verb had already in classical Greek come to
be
recognized as functionally a Present, it is from the point
of
view of the current usage a Historical Present rather than
a
Historical Perfect. Cf. L. and S. s.v.
79. The Perfect in 1 Cor.
tai, is probably Gnomic, referring to a state that
is wont to exist. If
a]pelh<luqen in Jas.