Subject: John 8:58 and Perfect Tense
Lars,
Can you please post to the b-greek list?
Thanks so much,
Mitchell
_____________________________________
Dear B-Greek Subscribers:
The claim has been made that the New World Translation's footnote on John 8:58
claimed that the verb tense of EIMI was a "perfect indicative." The criticism
is that there is no Greek "perfect indefinite" tense. The quote reflects a lack
of knowledge or misunderstanding regarding the footnote. Since this
misinformation is spread widely in popular books, I am happy to provide further
scholarly information and clarification regarding this claim.
The footnote in the NWT to John 8:58 (1950, 51) in its wording shows that the
identification of the "perfect indefinite tense" has to do with the ENGLISH
rendering; not the Greek original! So, of course one will not find such a tense
identified in a Greek grammar. Here is the footnote quoted in its entirety.
8:58 "I have been = EGW EIMI after the aorist infinitive clause PRIN ABRAAM
GENESQAI and hence properly rendered in the perfect indefinite tense."
Objections to the above footnote have been raised; such as: -- "At least in
Greek there is no such case." [Perhaps the critic intended 'tense' and not
'case.']
Reply: The expression "properly rendered in," has to do with the English
translation, not the Greek Original. "Render ... to express in other words, as
in another language; to translate."-Webster's New Twentieth Century Dictionary,
1975. The term "perfect indefinite tense" is not used to imply that there is
such a tense in Greek; but that the English translation is in the "perfect
indefinite tense."
-- The term "perfect indefinite tense" is an invention of the author of the
note."
-- "It is difficult to know what the author of the note ... means, since he
does not use standard grammatical terminology, nor is his argument documented
from standard grammars."
Reply: I refer the reader to previous posts in B-Greek on "John 8:58" where
standard Greek grammars are quoted showing that the translation of the Greek
present into an English perfect is in accord with the rules and idioms of Greek
and English.
Will such a tense be found in an English grammar? Yes! I here cite two that
perhaps were used by members of the New World Translation Committee at the time
of the 1950 translation. The two are "A New English Grammar Logical and
Historical, by Henry Sweet, M.A., Ph.D., LL.D., Clarendon Press, Oxford 1900,
p.105 and Crowell's Dictionary of English Grammar and Handbook of American
Usage, by Maurice H. Weseen, Associate Professor of English in the University
of Nebraska, Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York, 1928, p.178. I provide the
examples in chart form below.
[The reader will see this line up with Courier fonts]
A New English Grammar, p.105
........................INDEFINITE............DEFINITE
Pre......................I see...................I am seeing
Preterite...............I saw..................I was seeing
PERFECT............I have seen.........I have been seeing
Pluperfect............I had seen...........I had been seeing
Future.................I shall see...........I shall be seeing
Future Perfect......I shall have seen..I shall have been seeing Preterite
Future....I should see........I should be seeing
Crowell's Dictionary of English Grammar, p.178
........................INDEFINITE............DEFINITE
Present................I see...................I am seeing
Preterite...............I saw..................I was seeing
PERFECT............I have seen.........I have been seeing
Pluperfect............I had seen...........I had been seeing
Future.................I shall see...........I shall be seeing
Future Perfect......I shall have seen..I shall have been seeing Preterite
Future....I should see........I should be seeing
The terms "perfect" and "perfect indefinite tense" or "perfect tense
indicative" have been used in recent editions in the NWT for the sake of using
a more common term; not a more correct one.
In conclusion, the critic of the NWT John 8:58 footnote is shown to have not
completely understood or misquoted the reference. Please pass this information
along to any others who may have misunderstood this as well.
Further comments on why the tense cannot be a Greek Perfect tense:
The tense of EIMI in John 8:58 is the Extension from the Past idiom (aka the
Present of Past Action Still in Progress). The Greek Perfective Present
emphasizes that THE RESULTS of a past action are still continuing. For example,
at 1John 5:20 HO HUIOS TOU THEOU **HKEI**, KAI DEDWKEN HMIN tells us that "the
Son of God HAS COME." Now, was the Son of God still coming at the time John
wrote these words? Or is John not emphasizing the continuing RESULTS of that
coming? It is the latter, of course. However, the Extension from Past describes
an ACTION from past time continuing to the present. Thus, BDF tell us: "The
present is NOT PERFECTIVE in those cases where the duration or repetition of an
act up to and including the present is to be designated (a temporal expression
indicates the intended period of the past) . . . John 5 [sic - The intended
reference is to John 8; see German original]:58 EIMI." (1961:168, sec. 322). At
John 8:58, the Present EIMI with the expression of past time identifies this as
the "Present of Past Action Still in Progress." Jesus was alive in Abraham's
day and was STILL ALIVE when he spoke his words. The best translation offered
in ENGLISH for this is with the ENGLISH PERFECT "I have been". So, there is no
confusion between the Greek Perfective and the English Perfect.
Yours Truly,
Mitchell
Centennial Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses
Greenwood Village, CO
Email: 7380899@mcimail.com