FWIW to whoever:
I have been trained in the excerpted instruction below (and still refer to it and other sources extensively) & IMO Doug has also received such training, but it's beyond obvious that FG2 does not know or understand it this information. I post this for whoever else might be reading the nonsense and attacking accusations of FG2, who, IMO should be summarily ignored for his/her continuous false statements, personal attacks, eisegesis, infantile tactics, and so on. If anyone is in the Free Grace Interpretation Camp, there are much better and more decent proponents of that system.
The following is copied from Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics by Daniel Wallace. I have highlighted in bold & underlines some of the points made re: the classification of the Greek Present Tense speaking of
continuous action. The bold blue underlined text is my insertion. The opening table of contents show the many ways a Greek present tense can be interpreted & the instruction that follows discusses the many nuances of verb tense that must be taken into consideration when translating & interpreting.
Of special note pertaining to all the discussion that has gone on re:
continuous belief & eternal security, please see Wallace's take on John 3:16 below. Also, in proper humility (unlike the substantial lack of humility shown by FG2), knowing how difficult it is to accurately interpret all the nuances of the Greek language and its usage in the Biblical Text, please note how Wallace with his obvious extensive work in the language & the Text still uses words like "seems," when discussing interpretation of John's Gospel.
Wallace obliterates FG2's unlearned & biased attempts to discredit Doug's efforts to discuss a differing view than FG2's re: the nuances of the Greek present tense. The only customary retorts offered by FG2 to such textbook information or sourcing, is to evade, or to blurt that any credentialed source that doesn't agree with him/her, is a Calvinist, or some other camp related, or other type label that suits him/her. Such lowly discrediting attempts only discredit FG2.
So, with Doug who has had Greek training, with my having been trained in Greek, and with Wallace who wrote a textbook on Greek, all saying how FG2 is wrong re: what the Greek Present Tense can mean, 2 witnesses outside myself is more than enough for me. FG2 should not be trusted. Even if/when he/she makes a correct point here or there, the bulk of his/her input is simply doctrinal eisegesis done disrespectfully, which makes it impossible to deal on any specific verse objectively.
EXCERPT FROM GREEK GRAMMAR BEYOND THE BASICS
The Present Tense
Overview of Uses
I. Narrow-Band Presents
516
► A. Instantaneous Present (a.k.a. Aoristic or Punctiliar Present)
517
► B. Progressive Present (a.k.a. Descriptive Present)
518
II. Broad-Band Presents
519
A. Extending-From-Past Present
519
► B. Iterative Present
520
► C. Customary (Habitual or General) Present
521
► D. Gnomic Present
523
III. Special Uses of the Present
526
► A. Historical Present (Dramatic Present)
526
B. Perfective Present
532
C. Conative (Tendential, Voluntative) Present
534
1. In Progress, but not Complete (True Conative)
534
2. Not Begun, but About/Desired to be Attempted (Voluntative/Tendential)
535
► D. Futuristic Present
535
1. Completely Futuristic
536
2. Mostly Futuristic (Ingressive-Futuristic?)
537
► E. Present Retained in Indirect Discourse
537
Select Bibliography
BDF, 167-69, 172, 174 (§319-24, 335-36, 338-39);
Burton,
Moods and Tenses, 7-11, 46, 54-55 (§8-20, 96-97, 119-131);
Fanning,
Verbal Aspect, 198-240, 325-413;
K. L. McKay,
A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek: An Aspectual Approach (New York: Peter Lang, 1994) 39-42;
idem, “Time and Aspect in New Testament Greek,”
NovT 34 (1992) 209-28;
Moule,
Idiom Book, 7-8;
Porter,
Verbal Aspect, 163-244, 321-401;
idem,
Idioms, 28-33;
Robertson,
Grammar, 879-92;
Turner,
Syntax, 60-64, 74-81;
Young,
Intermediate Greek, 107-13.
514
Introduction: The Basic Meaning
Aspect
With reference to
aspect, the present tense is
internal (that is, it portrays the action from the inside of the event, without special regard for beginning or end), but it makes no comment as to fulfillment (or completion). The present tense’s portrayal of an event “
focuses on its development or progress and sees the occurrence
in regard to its internal make-up, without beginning or end in view.”1 It is sometimes called
progressive: It “basically represents an activity as in process (or in progress).”2
Time
With reference to
time, the present
indicative is usually present time, but it may be other than or broader than the present time on occasion (e.g., with historical present and gnomic present respectively).
Aspect + Time (The Unaffected Meaning)
What is fundamental to keep in mind as you examine each of the tenses is the difference between the unaffected meaning and the affected meaning and how they relate to each other. Part of this difference is between aspect and
Aktionsart. (The other part has to do with the temporal element of tense [restricted to the indicative mood].) Together, aspect and time constitute the “ontological meaning” or unaffected meaning of a given tense in the indicative. In this case, it is the meaning the present tense would have if we could see such a tense in a vacuum–without context, without a lexical intrusion from the verb, and without other grammatical features (either in the verb itself or in some other word in the sentence that is impacting the tense). In other words, the unaffected meaning of the present tense is its
basic idea. However, this unaffected meaning is only theoretical. No one has ever observed it for any of the tenses, simply because we cannot observe a tense that is not attached to a verb (which has lexical value): -ω is a morpheme, while πιστεύω is a present tense verb. The unaffected meaning, then, is something that has been extrapolated from actual usage.
By analogy, we say that contract verb stems end in either
alpha,
epsilon, or
omicron. Yet you will not find ἀγαπάω, φιλέω, or πληρόω in their uncontracted state
515
in the NT.3 We extrapolate such uncontracted forms on the basis of observed patterns of behavior. This is similar to our descriptions of the basic idea of the tenses.
What is the value of having such a theoretical knowledge of the tenses? It helps us in at least two ways. (We will illustrate its value by applying this discussion to the historical present.)
1) Since the affected meanings are what we call “Specific Uses,” the more we know how the tense is affected, the more certain we can be of its usage in a given passage.
The three intrusions mentioned above (lexical, contextual, grammatical) are the staple things that make up affected meanings. The more we analyze such intrusions, the better we can predict when a given tense (or case or voice or any other morpho-syntactic element of the language) will fit into a particular category of usage. For example, all undisputed examples of the historical present occur in the indicative mood (a grammatical intrusion), in the third person (a grammatical intrusion), and in narrative literature (contextual intrusion). Further, they only occur with certain kinds of verbs (lexical intrusion).
Thus if you wanted to identify a particular present tense as a historical present, you would want to check it against the various features of other
known historical presents. It would not do simply to want a particular present tense to be a historical present. In order to so label it you would have to find sufficient semantic parallels4 between the present tense in question and known historical presents. Lacking such parallels (especially if they are well defined as with the historical present), you would be hard pressed to call the present tense in question a historical present. Some think that the
first person present tense verb, εἰμί, in John 8:58 is a historical present. But since all undisputed historical presents are third person, and since none involve the equative verb, this is rather doubtful.5
2) It is important to understand that
the unaffected meaning can be overridden–to some degree but not entirely–by the intrusions. That is to say, it is not correct to say that the unaffected meaning will always be present in full force in any given context.
The unaffected meaning is not, therefore, the lowest common denominator of the tense uses. But neither will it be completely abandoned. An author
516
chooses his particular tense for a reason, just as he chooses his mood, lexical root, etc. All of these contribute to the meaning he wishes to express. They are all, as it were, vying for control. Again, take the historical present as an example. An author uses the present tense in narrative for some reason. The options are really quite simple: either for its aspect or for its time. Most scholars are of the opinion that the aspect of the historical present is no different from an aorist’s. If that is so, then an author has chosen the present tense for its
temporal significance. The author does not use the historical present to indicate real time, of course, but for dramatic effect–for the sake of vividness.6
In sum, it is imperative that one pay close attention to the various influences affecting the meaning of the tense. All of these influences, in combination with the present tense, contribute to the specific category of usage under question.7
Specific Uses
The specific uses of the present tense can be categorized into three large groups: narrow-band presents, broad-band presents, and special uses. “Narrow band” means that the action is portrayed as occurring over a relatively short interval; “broad band” means that the action is portrayed as occurring over a longer interval; “special uses” include instances that do not fit into the above categories, especially those involving a time frame that is
other than the present.8
Instruction re: use of the Present Tense to describe a continuous condition
► C. Customary (Habitual or General) Present
1. Definition
The customary present is used to signal either an action that
regularly occurs or
an ongoing state.20 The action is usually
iterative, or repeated, but not without interruption. This usage is quite common.
The difference between the customary (proper) and the iterative present is mild. Generally, however, it can be said that the
customary present is
broader in its idea of the “present” time and describes an event that occurs
regularly. The customary present is an iterative present with the temporal ends “kicked out.”
522
There are two types of customary present, repeated action and ongoing state. The stative present is more pronounced in its temporal restrictions than the customary present or the gnomic present.
2. Key to Identification:
customarily, habitually, continually
The two types of customary present are lexically determined: One is repeated action (habitual present [
customarily, habitually]), while the other is
ongoing state (stative present [continually]).
Chart 52 - The Force of the Customary Present
3. Illustrations
a. Clear Examples
Luke 18:12
νηστεύω δὶς τοῦ σαββάτου
I [customarily]
fast twice a week
John 3:16
πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται
everyone who [continually] believes in him should not perish
This could also be taken as a gnomic present, but if so it is not a proverbial statement, nor is it simply a general maxim. In this Gospel, there seems to be a qualitative distinction between the ongoing act of believing and the simple fact of believing.
John 14:17
παρ᾽ ὑμῖν μένει καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν ἔσται
he
continually remains with you and he shall be in you
1 Cor 11:26
ὁσάκις γὰρ ἐὰν ἐσθίητε τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον καὶ τὸ ποτήριον πίνητε, τὸν θάνατον τοῦ κυρίου καταγγέλλετε ἄχρι οὗ ἔλθῃ.
For as often as
you eat this bread and
drink the cup,
you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
Heb 10:25
μὴ ἐγκαταλείποντες τὴν ἐπισυναγωγὴν ἑαυτῶν, καθὼς ἔθος τισίν21
not [
habitually]
forsaking our assembly, as is the habit of some