>My difficulty with this approach is that to my thinking, Peter does
>not NEED to be told to follow Jesus ~ He wants nothing less or else
>than to follow Him.
I think this is highly unlikely. The fact that Peter follows, and then
waffles, and then denies, means that there is more to it than indicated here.
>His problem is in knowing THAT and WHEN he IS
>following Him, and his distractibility when he is doing so, as
>evidenced by his seeing the 'beloved disciple' also following and
>wanting to know 'What about him?'
>
I dont see Peter in quite this light.
>Hence the context, to me, dictates the indicative AND the imperative,
>and the Greek morphological ambiguity is exactly on point...
>
No, I dont think so. Though a double entendre is sometimes intentional, I
do not think it is here.
>George Blaisdell
>
Jim
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD
Quartz Hill School of Theology
jwest@highland.net