Unfortunately embarrassing Mr MuzicMan on his knowledge of Greek -
May 4th, 2012, 10:14 AM
Unfortunately it has become necessary to silence a rather insolent member of this forum with regard to his recent boasting on his knowledge of Greek.
Poster "themuzicman" has recently stated on another thread that the Greek grammatical perfect relates "an ongoing action in the past".
Those who understand these things will of couse immediately recognise this as a blatant error: the perfect relates a completed action: Mr Muzic is in fact describing the imperfect.
This is too basic an error for any supposed student of Greek (or for that matter any other Indo-European language): it is not simply a matter of degrees, but a fundamental error at the very heart of grammar and philosophy.
Anyone who states that the grammatical perfect relates an ongoing action in the past, is a hack. Accordingly I would suggest that Mr Muzic's "master's level" Greek certificate was obtained from a Cornflakes packet.
Ah, the personal attack thread. Collosians must be feeling really butt hurt to create a whole thread after losing so badly in the various "debates" he's attempted to engage in.
To correct the record, I said that a GREEK perfect verb is an ongoing action in the past that is completed within the time frame of the sentence. Thus, in Rev 13:8, where the book of was being written in the past, the perfect indicates that writing in the book began "before the foundation of the world", and continued until some undisclosed point before the time context of Rev 13:8, which is set in the end times, when that action was complete.
The basic thought of the perfect tense is that the progress of an action has been completed and the results of the action are continuing on, in full effect. In other words, the progress of the action has reached its culmination and the finished results are now in existence. Unlike the English perfect, which indicates a completed past action, the Greek perfect tense indicates the continuation and present state of a completed past action.
Notice that the action has progress in the past. That means it is ongoing in the past. What makes the perfect unique is that what happened in the past has present time (in this case, the apostle John in the echaton) implications.
In this case, the completed writing of the book has present tense implications for John at that time (which are obvious from the text.)
An imperfect verb is quite similar to a perfect verb, except that its impact is felt at the time of the verb, rather than in the present.
The imperfect tense shows continuous or linear type of action just like the present tense. It always indicates an action continually or repeatedly happening in past time. It portrays the action as going on for some extended period of time in the past.
SO, once again, Collosians shows his complete ignorance of biblical Greek, and puts his foot in his mouth by arrogantly trying to make such a claim.
OP refuted. End of thread.
I don't care how systematic your theology is, until you show me how biblical it is.
2 Tim 2:15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.
I said that a GREEK perfect verb is an ongoing action in the past that is completed within the time frame of the sentence.
Thus you show you have not been trained properly, and are indeed a cut-and-paste linguist.
1. A perfect verb is not an ongoing action in the past, and that is that. It relates no ongoing aspect at all: that is the imperfect's job
2. "time frame of the sentence" is ambigous, and means nothing. Sentences don't have a time frame, for a sentence is not the same thing as a proposition.
Thus, in Rev 13:8, where the book of was being written in the past, the perfect indicates that writing in the book began "before the foundation of the world", and continued until some undisclosed point before the time context of Rev 13:8, which is set in the end times, when that action was complete.
No it doesn't, because the perfect does not relate an ongoing action.
You have had no formal training, and are indeed a hack.
A linguist will never have to quote other sources in order to explain things like the grammatical perfect.
And indeed your sources themselves don't know what they are on about:
Unlike the English perfect, which indicates a completed past action, the Greek perfect tense indicates the continuation and present state of a completed past action.
This guy is a hack.
1. The English perfect actually indicates completed past action inclusive of its on-going effect in the present. So the definition here is itself incomplete. That is, the perfect, whether English or any other language, entails experiential possession: in "I have kicked the ball", "kicked the ball" is possessed by "I" so that we can say that it has become part of the person who is "I", hence perfect
2. The English perfect can be extended to include the statal passive, which form it used to take:
"The names are written in the book", which is the same as what this guy is erroneously saying is exclusive to the Greek, and which is how the KJV renders the passage at Rev 13:8.
Simarily, "he is come".
2. The Greek perfect is used in many places to indicate a one off event. In Gal 1:9 it is used to say: "We said before", and in Gal 4:23 to related "was born" with regard to Ishmael and Isaac.
So your source is a novice.
Regarding your 'understanding' of your source:
The basic thought of the perfect tense is that the progress of an action has been completed
This "the progress of an action" does not entail the progressive aspect, which you are confusing it with, and which relates the view from a sub-interval of time. The perfect is not interceptable at a sub-interval; the progressive is.
Last edited by Colossians; May 7th, 2012 at 12:48 AM.
SO, once again, Collosians shows his complete ignorance of biblical Greek
Even my Greek Profs were still learning but complete ignorance?
Originally Posted by themuzicman
...and puts his foot in his mouth by arrogantly trying to make such a claim.
OP refuted. End of thread.
The problem is you over-extend yourself. You are the guy my prof warned me not to become. I'm a 'bit' cocky when it comes to the languages but not over-inflated. In my estimation, from talks with you, you are more or less about the same as I am. I would hope you are keeping up on your study else I'm going to pass you by.
I appreciate arguing but you over-assess your own language prowess. Most of us two year students are about the same. Having additional languages, helps. Having great English grades, helps. Keeping up so we don't lose it, helps.
Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us,
to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, forever. Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21
1Co 13:11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. But when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. - Let's at least work at it?
Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."
I have alluded to the fact that Mr Muzic’s lack of education has resulted in his not being able to rightly appropriate and divide just what his sources are saying.
Regarding this from his source:
The basic thought of the perfect tense is that the progress of an action has been completed and the results of the action are continuing on, in full effect
: instead of actually proving that the adjunct "from the foundation of the world" should be attached to "have been written in the book", Mr Muzic instead assumes it up front and then (erroneously) reverse 'derives' that the resulting progressive result - names being progressively added to the book over time - is what his source is speaking about here when he refers to "the progress of an action".
But the perfect is not inclusive of the adjunct, but is the perfect on its own, and Mr Muzic is therefore like the evolutionist who says that the proof that we evolved, is that we are here!
And so Mr Muzic fails to notice what his source is actually getting at, which is more clearly stated at the end of the same paragraph:
the Greek perfect tense indicates the continuation and present state of a completed past action.
That is, his source is actually saying that the unappended-to “have been written in the book” is actually to be rendered as the English statal passive “are written in the book”, which is the rendering in the KJV and which provides for no progressive interpretation: Mr Muzic's source is saying that the focus of the unappended-to perfect is the resulting perfect state (which comes as no surprise), and not on whatever occured in order to get to it.
So as is often the case with those who appeal to “the Greek”, they are not the brightest of chaps, but rather, pseudo-intellectuals.
And just to add, Mr Muzic's source could express himself better. For one thing he could include the fact that he is primarily speaking of the passive voice, and he should speak of the perfect not as a tense but as an aspect.
Note: Thank goodness this site at least uses the NKJV as its default bible link, for the NKJV rendering is correct: at Rev 13:8 it is not "names which are written in the book of life from the foundation of the world", but "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world".
Last edited by Colossians; May 7th, 2012 at 07:52 PM.