[B-Greek] 1 John 1.9 Ed Glasscock in latest BibSac

Eddie Mishoe edmishoe at yahoo.com
Thu May 7 13:57:33 EDT 2009

I always appreciate Dr. Conrad's replies, and when he takes an opposite position than I do, I begin to hyperventilate.

He lists two passages in support of future-referring Present Tense Indicative verbs. I did a rather extensive study of my own and came to the conclusion that about 99% of all Present Tense Indicative verbs were "now time" in relation to the deictic center and when a temporal proposition was being expressed. I say (I could have used "I said" which would be true but in English this "I say" is simply an idiomatic usage and all native English speakers in the US clearly understand this usage) 99% because my study was not exhaustive. (Incidentally, this is one reason I find Porter's conclusions to be anything but linguistically grounded.)

The second example given is Mt 26:2 οἴδατε ὅτι μετὰ
> δύο ἡμέρας τὸ πάσχα γίνεται,
> καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου
> παραδίδοται εἰς τὸ σταυρωθῆναι
(My computer apparently can not display a mu.)

The deictic center is META DUO hHMERAS. So, AFTER two days, so let's just say on the second day, the Present Tense verbs are used, not the Future Tense Verbs. Future Tense verbs would be inappropriate since the writer has fast forwarded us to the "future time." This is the importance of deictic centers. 

In Rev 22:20, TACU is not a deictic center, ever. Deictic centers are not adverbs modifying verbs. TACU simply tells us additional information about the coming; it does not shift the reader to a different time on the time line (as in "after two days"). If the reader is not moved to a different location on the time line, there is no deictic center being employed.

The phrase, AMHN, ERCOU, KURIE IHSOU!, is in response to the statement that he is coming, and how is he coming? Soon, quickly. This AMHN phrase has the sense, "Indeed, Come (now), Lord Jesus! Again, this Present Tense is required since it is not the individual's desire that Jesus come in the future, but even right then, hence ERCOU.

I must also admit that there ought to be Present Tense verbs referring to the future, since all languages has such idioms, but I don't think these two examples represent such. Of course, I would not be surprised to find future-referring Present Tenses; it's just that I haven't seen one YET. I need to do more research obviously. (But finding a future-referring Present would not turn me into a Porterite. All languages have idiomatic expressions and such concepts as a future-referring Present would be odd, just as a future-referring Aorist should be out there, but it too should be  odd, and should not be used to support Porterism.)

Eddie Mishoe


More information about the B-Greek mailing list