|
|
|
Chapter Five About the Greek Infinitive In order to understand the difference between the past tense and present tense infinitives which are used in the Greek text, it is necessary to learn some basic facts about Greek infinitives. This information can be found in comprehensive Greek grammars which are available in many libraries. For this study, the author has chosen to use A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by Dana and Mantey. The study will focus on the use of the Greek infinitive with a preposition and a definite article to express the relationship of the action to time, as we find in Acts 2:1. In beginning this study, it is important to understand the basic function of an infinitive. In the Greek language, just as in English, the infinitive does not function as a verb but as a noun. Because it is a verb that is used as a noun, it is called a verbal noun. As Dana and Mantey explain, "The infinitive is strictly a verbal noun, and not a mood. Its significance in Greek can never be appreciated until this fact is recognized. No idiom is more decidedly peculiar to the language than this substantive character of the infinitive" ( A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, pp. 208-209). In English, the word "to" is always used with the infinitive form of the verb, as in "to be," "to come," and "to speak." The Greek infinitive is similar to the English infinitive unless it is preceded by the definite article "the." Remember that when the definite article "the" is used, the infinitive is known as an articular infinitive. In New Testament Greek, when the articular infinitive is combined with a preposition, it limits the infinitive to a specific time period. Dana and Mantey state the following: "Nothing distinguishes the noun force of the infinitive more than its use with the [definite] article.... This item is one of the proofs of the general good quality of New Testament Greek.... The presence of the article with the infinitive has no fixed effect upon its varieties in use. That is, a particular use of the writer, in accordance with his desire to make the expression specific [with the use of the definite article "the"] or general [not using the definite article "the"]. As to the New Testament, an apparent exception to the above statement is the infinitive with a preposition, which is always articular [that is, when an infinitive is preceded by a preposition it always requires a definite article, which, with the preposition, designates the specific time of the action]" (Ibid., p. 211). In Acts 2:1, as we have seen, the Greek infinitive is sumplhrousqai sumpleerousthai. It is in the present tense and the passive voice, which means that the action "was being accomplished" or "was being fulfilled." Since the present tense infinitive sumpleerousthai is preceded by the preposition en en and the definite article tw too, it has a specific and exact meaning in relationship to time. Dana and Mantey leave no room to misinterpret the meaning of this present tense articular infinitive: “In the locative construction [in the dative case] with en tw [as in Acts 2:1] the infinitive denotes contemporaneous time “ (Ibid., p. 216). The word “contemporaneous,” as defined in Webster’s Dictionary, means "happening or belonging within the same time period." The present tense articular infinitive that is used in Acts 2:1 is clearly expressing action that was in progress at the same, or contemporaneous, time. The writers of the New Testament commonly used the present tense articular infinitive to describe action that was taking place at a contemporaneous time. When Luke wrote his Gospel, he used the locative construction of en tw en too with the present tense infinitive a total of 32 times. In the book of Acts, he used it 7 times. In every use of the present tense articular infinitive, Luke was describing events or actions that were in the process of happening at a contemporaneous time. When the Greek text uses the preposition en en and the definite article tw too with a present tense infinitive, there can be no doubt that the express purpose is to show contemporaneous time and ongoing action. The words en tw en too are never used to describe past or completed action. The articular infinitive which expresses past or completed action requires a different preposition and a different definite article and is written in a different case. A past tense articular infinitive phrase is easily identifiable because it differs in construction and spelling from a present tense articular infinitive. Dana and Mantey explain the construction of the past tense articular infinitive phrase: "The infinitive with meta [meta, a preposition meaning "after"] to [to, the definite article "the"] is used to express subsequent time [time which follows a completed action]" (Ibid., p. 216). The preposition meta meta and the definite article to to are always used with the past tense articular infinitive to express action that was completed in the past. These two Greek words are never used with a present tense articular infinitive, which requires the strict use of en en and tw too. In addition to a different preposition and a different definite article, a different case is used with a past tense articular infinitive phrase as compared to a present tense articular infinitive. The structure of the New Testament Greek requires that the past tense articular infinitive be written in the genitive case, while the present tense articular infinitive is written in the dative, or locative, case. Because each Greek case has its own spelling, the past tense articular infinitive will contain letters which are not found in the present tense articular infinitive. These differences in spelling and construction make it possible for a reader of the Greek text to easily distinguish a past tense articular infinitive from a present tense articular infinitive. As Luke used the present tense articular infinitive to show action in progress during contemporaneous time, he also used the past tense articular infinitive with meta to meta to to express completed action and subsequent time. In his Gospel, he used the past tense articular infinitive 24 times. In the book of Acts, he also used it 24 times, but he did not use meta to meta to with a past tense articular infinitive to describe the events in Acts 2:1. If Luke had intended to convey completed action and subsequent time in Acts 2:1, he would have used meta to meta to with a past tense infinitive. The fact that he used en tw en too with a present tense articular infinitive clearly shows that the action was being fulfilled at a contemporaneous time. By using a present tense articular infinitive, Luke was revealing that the events in Acts 2 were happening on the fiftieth day, or the actual day of Pentecost--"while the fiftieth day [Pentecost] was being fulfilled." Luke's Use of the Past Tense Infinitive in Acts 1:3 We have examined Luke's use of a present tense articular infinitive in Acts 2:1 to express ongoing action at a contemporaneous time. Now let us examine Luke's use of a past tense articular infinitive. In the first chapter of the book of Acts, Luke used a past tense articular infinitive to describe a past event and subsequent time. This past tense articular infinitive is found in Acts 1:3. The KJV translation reads: "To whom [to the apostles] also He showed himself alive after His passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days...." The phrase "after His passion” in Acts 1:3 is translated from a Greek articular infinitive phrase which expresses action that was completed at a previous time in the past. Here are the actual words in the Greek text: meta to paqein auton meta to pathein auton after the passion His (a literal translation of the Greek but awkward in English) Below is a detailed analysis of this past tense articular infinitive phrase: meta meta--the preposition "after,” used with a past tense articular infinitive to show completed action and subsequent time. to to--the definite article "the,” used immediately after the preposition meta meta. In this verse to to, meaning "the," was left untranslated in both Berry's and the KJV, because a literal translation is awkward in English. Leaving the definite article untranslated does not affect the meaning that is expressed by this past tense articular infinitive. paqein pathein--a past tense infinitive derived from the base verb pascw paschoo, translated "passion" in the KJV and "had suffered" by Berry. auton [auton]--meaning "His," as in the KJV; translated "He" by Berry. Notice that Luke used the past tense articular infinitive phrase meta to paqein meta to pathein to describe an event which had already occurred and which was completed before a subsequent action. Luke used this past tense articular infinitive phrase at the beginning of the book of Acts to relate the past event of Jesus' passion, which was completed before Jesus presented Himself alive to the apostles. This verse in the first chapter of Acts clearly demonstrates Luke's ability to use the past tense articular infinitive. Yet in the following chapter, Acts 2, Luke did not use the past tense articular infinitive to describe the day of Pentecost--"the fiftieth day." If Luke had intended to convey that "the fiftieth day" had already come to an end, he would certainly have expressed this completed action by using a past tense articular infinitive with meta to meta to as he did in Acts 1:3. Instead, Luke chose to use a present tense articular infinitive with en tw en too in Acts 2:1 because he specifically intended to express action that was taking place at that very time. There is no question that Luke's purpose was to convey to the reader that "the fiftieth day," the day of Pentecost, was in the process of being fulfilled. As we have learned, the construction of the present tense articular infinitive phrase is very different from the construction of the past tense articular infinitive phrase. If we compare the present tense articular infinitive phrase that Luke did use in Acts 2:1 with the past tense articular infinitive phrase which he did not use in Acts 2:1, the difference between the two phrases can easily be seen. The two infinitive phrases as they are written in Greek are shown below with their accompanying translations. The first phrase shows how Acts 2:1 would have been written if Luke had intended to express past action and subsequent time. This past tense articular infinitive phrase CANNOT BE FOUND in Acts 2:1 in the Greek text.
The
four possible translations of this past tense articular infinitive
phrase that are underlined above show how Acts 2:1 would have to be
translated if Luke had used a past tense articular infinitive to
express completed action and subsequent time. Each translation
reflects the correct meaning of this past tense phrase. However, since
this past tense articular infinitive phrase is NOT USED in the
Greek text, NONE OF THE ABOVE TRANSLATIONS IS A CORRECT
INTERPRETATION OF ACTS 2:1. No interpretation of Acts 2:1 is
correct unless it accurately conveys the true meaning of the actual
words that are used in the Greek text. The words that do appear in the Greek text are the exact words that we see in the present tense articular infinitive phrase below. Note the words en tw en too, which are used to express ongoing action at a contemporaneous time, as the accompanying translations clearly show.
All
three above translations of the Greek text are correct. Each of these
translations expresses action that was taking place at a contemporaneous
time, as it was actually happening and was being fulfilled. All three
translations show that this action was ongoing and had not yet been
completed. While all these translations express the true meaning of
the Greek text, the third translation is the most accurate because the
words "was being fulfilled" reflect the precise meaning of the
present tense and the passive voice of the articular infinitive. This present tense articular infinitive phrase gives us a much more accurate understanding of Acts 2:1 than can possibly be derived from using only the definition of the base verb sumplhrow sumpleeroo. While the base verb can supply a general definition, it cannot give the specific meaning of Acts 2:1. Only the articular infinitive can convey the exact meaning of the Greek text, and it is this meaning which must be correctly reflected in any translation. Those who attempt to interpret Acts 2:1 by using only a concordance definition of the base verb sumplhrow sumpleeroo are revealing their complete lack of knowledge of the rules of New Testament Greek. Their failure to understand and apply these rules has resulted in great error in their interpretation of Acts 2:1 and has misled many to accept a grievous doctrinal fallacy. When we examine Acts 2:1 in the Greek text, we find that the structure of the New Testament Greek is so precise and exact that it is impossible to mistake the meaning of the present tense articular infinitive that is used in this verse. Let's take another look at the present tense articular infinitive phrase that Luke used in Acts 2:1. The exact phrase as it appears in the Greek text can be seen in the first line of Greek words below. We know that the words en tw en too in this phrase are expressing action that is taking place and has not yet been completed. The second line of Greek words contains the past tense articular infinitive, which is NOT USED in Acts 2:1. The words meta to meta to, which express action completed in the past, are not found in this verse.
The Actual Present Tense Articular Infinitive Phrase Used in Acts 2:1 1) Kai en2 tw3 sumplhrousqaii4 thn hmeran thV penthkosthV ... The Past Tense Articular Infinitive Phrase NOT USED in Acts 2:1 2) Kai meta2 to3 Sumplhrouqhnaii4 thn hmeran thV penthkosthV ... As the reader compares the above phrases, it is obvious that the second and third words in line 1 do not match the second and third words in line 2. Notice also that the fourth word in line 1 does not have the same ending as the fourth word in line 2. The rules of New Testament Greek grammar demand the different spellings that are found in the endings of these two words. In New Testament Greek, the difference in the spelling of the present tense articular infinitive sumplhrousqaii and the past tense articular infinitive sumplhrouqhnaii is a strict grammatical requirement. It is an absolute rule of Greek grammar that the ending sqaii is used only to designate the present tense of this articular infinitive, and that the ending qhnaii is used only to designate this articular infinitive in the past tense. The rules of New Testament Greek absolutely do not allow any other construction of the phrases and spelling of these articular infinitives! The differences in these two articular infinitive phrases are impossible to overlook. Even those who have no knowledge of Greek can see that the two phrases are not identical. To further emphasize these differences, the words that do not match in lines 1 and 2 are listed in opposite columns below. In the left column are the present tense words that ARE found in the Greek text. In the right column are the past tense words that are NOT found in Acts 2:1. A Comparative Analysis
The
above comparison enables the reader to clearly see the major differences
in the two articular infinitive phrases. One phrase is designed to
express ongoing action at a contemporaneous time, and the other is
designed to express action completed in the past. These differences
reflect the exactness and preciseness of the Greek articular infinitive
in relationship to time and circumstances. The fact that Luke used both present and past tense articular infinitives in the book of Acts demonstrates that he fully understood the difference in the structure and the purpose of both types of phrases. Luke's use of the present tense articular infinitive phrase in Acts 2:1 shows that his purpose was to express ongoing action at a contemporaneous time. The words that Luke chose to use in this verse do not express and therefore should not be construed or interpreted to mean completed action that had already taken place in the past. To claim that this present tense articular infinitive phrase means action completed at a past time is clearly an erroneous interpretation which violates the Greek text.
|