Re: Aorist Imperative form of Mark 1:3

Edward Hobbs (EHOBBS@WELLESLEY.EDU)
Wed, 04 Sep 1996 11:38:22 -0500 (EST)

Carl,
Your comments on the imnperatives in Mark are exactly on target,
and of course pleased me very much. But you have added one tiny bit more
to the evidence that Mark is not really "bad Greek". His Greek is simple,
and his vocabulary is minimal (not as minimal as John, nor as simple!), but
he is capable of expressing just what needs to be expressed, when it
matters--offering us even "eloquent tense differences"!

--Edward
-------------------------------------------------------------

EI TIS QELEI OPISW MOU AKOLOUQEIN, APARNHSASQW hEAUTON KAI ARATW TON
STAURON AUTOU KAI AKOULOUQEITW MOI.

I've always felt that the tense differences in these 3 imperatives are by
no means arbitrary: "If any one is willing to follow (after) me, let him
deny himself--once for all time--, take up his cross--once for all time--,
and begin to follow me continuously." I suppose Will Wagers would call that
a "hypertranslation," but I don't think that the Greek says any less than
that.

I recall Billy McMinn (wherever he may be), who taught me my first year of
Greek, told an apocryphal story of a tourist at Delphi who went out to see
the ruins one morning and left a good pair of shoes with an attendant at
the hotel with a present imperative, "Polish these shoes," only to return
several hours later and find the attendant still polishing them--he ought
to have used an aorist imperative. Of course, one can't imagine that this
ever happened, but I thought it was a useful illustration. But I'm grateful
to him also for pointing out these eloquent tense differences in Mark 8:34.