In Mk 5:34 the pres. impv. ISQI is used in reference to something that had
_already_ taken place. Jesus says to the woman, H PISTIS SOU SESWKEN SE.
hUPAGE EIS EIRHNHN KAI *ISQI* UGIHS APO THS MASTIGOS SOU. (Your faith
has healed you; fo in peace and be healed from your affliction.)
{snip}
But I don't remember ever seeing an imperative
that confirms a *previous _condition_*.
{snip}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Take a look at Matt. 2:13. Specifically:
. . . FEUGE EIS AIGUPTON KAI ISQI EKEI EWS . . .
Here we have a case were all the commanded actions are still future. But
take a close look at KAI ISQI EKEI EWS. As the commanded actions unfold
FEUGE EIS AIGUPTON leads to the state of being in Egypt. Relative to that
state, the command KAI ISQI EKEI EWS is an imperative to remain in the
current state. This doesn't really solve all the problems with MK 5:34 but it
illustrates how ISQI can be used to *confirm a previous condition*, i.e.,
being in Egypt.
Note that the English translations are a hinderence in this case. If you were
to read these two passages in English you would miss the point. The
similarity between them gets lost in the paraphrasing of ISQI EWS
and ISQI UGIHS.
Clay Bartholomew
Three Tree Point