The periphrastic perfect.

[Gr8Grace]

Like I said, the ordinary 2nd person plural passive perfect of that verb is never used in the NT.

That may reflect the ongoing simplification of Greek that was taking place at the time, or it may reflect the fact that many New Testament authors were thinking in Aramaic to some extent.

However, nothing can be read into the use of the periphrastic perfect here. Periphrastic perfects are common in the NT.

Loose translation......"I don't know."

 

[Gr8Grace]

I would like that to be true, because I'm a Calvinist, but you can't infer "we will be saved" from the verb tense in this verse.

Well, then you don't even know what the ordinary perfect means.

 

[Radagast]

Well, then you don't even know what the ordinary perfect means.

The Greek perfect means a present state resulting from a past event. It does not say anything about the future (except for the future perfect, which is a different tense, and had vanished from the language in NT times).

 

[Gr8Grace]

The Greek perfect means a present state resulting from a past event. It does not say anything about the future (except for the future perfect, which is a different tense, and had vanished from the language in NT times).

The perfect tense means a COMPLETED ACTION.(this is why we get all the tenses...Have been saved, are saved and will be saved)

It does emphasize the present tense of the completed action, but don't forget the COMPLETED action. We can read Eph 2:8 today and 3000 days from now. Whenever we presently read "have been saved" it remains true. The perfect is a completed action.......that WILL endure.

The periphrasis in Eph 2:8 added the emphasis to what Paul was saying.

 

[SkyWriting]

Nope. And this thread would be for you and people who think like you.

If 'continuing to believe' was a condition..........the periphrastic perfect could not have been used. Salvation could not have been described as, "saved in the past, presently saved, with that salvation enduring forever."

So you bring up the point of this thread. Prove to us that the periphrastic perfect of 'have been saved' was not used. Paul could not have said this...........if there was a condition attached to 'have been saved.'

Jesus did die to save all people from sin.
This is not an event to be repeated.
So salvation is eternally available
for the past and the future.
People however, have a linear existence.
It's not possible for man to reconcile these
two realities. Not even Paul can do it.

 

[Radagast]

The perfect tense means a COMPLETED ACTION.

Not exactly. "A present state resulting from a past action" is more accurate. That's what the textbook by Wenham says, for example. Every other textbook I've seen says something similar.

The perfect is a completed action.......that WILL endure.

No, there is no such implication. The "present state" is seen as ongoing, but not necessarily indefinitely.

 

[Gr8Grace]

Not exactly. "A present state resulting from a past action" is more accurate. That's what the textbook by Wenham says, for example. Every other textbook I've seen says something similar.

I have no problem with that. It can be today or 20 years from now. It is always the present when we read "have been saved."

No, there is no such implication. The "present state" is seen as ongoing, but not necessarily indefinitely.

And this is why I still say, you have no clue of the periphrastic perfect NOR the ordinary perfect.

I have made a cake.........At some point in the future, does it become untrue that I made a cake?

No, I made a cake. And It carries on indefinitely.

You have been saved.Perfect tense........ a completed action, that carries on INDEFINITELY.

 

[Radagast]

And this is why I still say, you have no clue of the periphrastic perfect NOR the ordinary perfect.

You are very fond of saying that, but you never refer to any actual textbooks.

I have made a cake.........At some point in the future, does it become untrue that I made a cake?

No, I made a cake. And It carries on indefinitely.

Incorrect. The cake does not carry on indefinitely. After the cake itself has gone, the appropriate Greek tense becomes the pluperfect.

And the way that the perfect and pluperfect differ from the aorist and imperfect is their emphasis on the state resulting from the past action (present state for the perfect, past state for the pluperfect).

 

[Gr8Grace]

You are very fond of saying that, but you never refer to any actual textbooks.

Course II, Lesson 3

Incorrect. The cake does not carry on indefinitely. After the cake itself has gone, the appropriate Greek tense becomes the pluperfect.

And the way that the perfect and pluperfect differ from the aorist and imperfect is their emphasis on the state resulting from the past action (present state for the perfect, past state for the pluperfect).

Nice try.

So 'You have been saved' should have been pluperfect, because salvation itself can "be gone?"

It's the truth of a cake being made......that carries on.

It's the truth of "having been saved" that carries on.

And I would guess you know exactly what I meant in the first place.

 

[Radagast]

Course II, Lesson 3

Thanks. I'd say that "the perfect tense is a primary tense because it emphasizes the present, or ongoing result of a completed action" agrees with what I said.

There is nothing there about extension of the result forever into the future.

So 'You have been saved' should have been pluperfect, because salvation itself can "be gone?"

No, I did not say that. And, because I'm a Calvinist, I don't believe that salvation can ever be described in the pluperfect.

It's the truth of a cake being made......that carries on.

But the cake doesn't carry on. Have you never eaten a cake? One describes the baking of the cake in the perfect while it exists, and in the pluperfect after it's gone.

To quote your website:

PERFECT: She has made a cake for dessert. The cake is now available to be served.

PLUPERFECT: She had made a cake for dessert. The cake was available to be served at some time in the past, after previously having been made.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Jesus is not only our Guide, but in us Jesus changes our nature so it is no longer our nature to choose to depart from Him.

It appears you misunderstand our new nature. When a person believes in Christ, they are born again, regenerated. 2 Cor 5:17 - we are a new creation. What must not be forgotten is that we STILL HAVE our original human nature, from which we sin. We do NOT lose that nature until we die and leave our bodies.

Jesus becomes our new inner Person > Galatians 4:19.

Actually, it is the Holy Spirit who seals and indwells the believer:
Eph 1:13,14 and Gal 3:2,5.

And Jesus as our new and growing inner Person does not choose to leave God > Galatians 2:20.

The verse doesn't support your claim. Further, Jesus Himself taught that some "believe for a while" and then "fall away". So the claim that a saved person cannot cease to believe is false.
hoever overcomes us. So, yes I do need to heed this warning and be prayerful about whom I trust and how I depend on anything or not.[/QUOTE]

 

[Gr8Grace]

Thanks. I'd say that "the perfect tense is a primary tense because it emphasizes the present, or ongoing result of a completed action" agrees with what I said.

There is nothing there about extension of the result forever into the future.

What don't you understand about," ongoing results from a COMPLETED ACTION?"

You have been saved. A completed action.

If it didn't extend into the future, or FOREVER.........it would NOT be complete.

No, I did not say that. And, because I'm a Calvinist, I don't believe that salvation can ever be described in the pluperfect.

And it should be very obvious that I am not. But, here we are talking about the pluperfect. Wonder why?

But the cake doesn't carry on. Have you never eaten a cake. One describes the baking of the cake in the perfect while it exists, and in the pluperfect after it's gone.

To quote your website:

PERFECT: She has made a cake for dessert. The cake is now available to be served.

PLUPERFECT: She had made a cake for dessert. The cake was available to be served at some time in the past, after previously having been made.

Sure seems to me you are arguing for the pluperfect of "have been saved."

 

[Radagast]

If it didn't extend into the future, or FOREVER.........it would NOT be complete.

There is no such implication of extension into the future in the Greek perfect.

But, here we are talking about the pluperfect. Wonder why?

Because the pluperfect describes exactly the same kind of action as the perfect, but after the consequences have stopped.

To quote your website:

PERFECT: She has made a cake for dessert. The cake is now available to be served.

PLUPERFECT: She had made a cake for dessert. The cake was available to be served at some time in the past, after previously having been made.

Sure seems to me you are arguing for the pluperfect of "have been saved."

I believe in the 5th point of Calvinism, but on more solid grounds than your misunderstanding of the perfect.

 

[FreeGrace2]

There is no such implication of extension into the future in the Greek perfect.

How about what Paul said about "extension into the future", regarding the believer's security.

Rom 8:35-39
35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword?
36 As it is written: “For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered.”
37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.
38 For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,
39 neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

There it is, in full color: "nor the future".

But, if that isn't enough evidence, how about what Jesus Himself self about the future?

John 10:28 - I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.

Here we have a very clear statement about the CAUSE and EFFECT of possessing eternal life.

Jesus is the CAUSE of possessing eternal life. He is the One who gives eternal life.

Never perishing is the EFFECT of possessing eternal life. Those who have been given eternal life shall never perish.

I believe in the 5th point of Calvinism, but on more solid grounds than your misunderstanding of the perfect.

Such as the above verses.

 

[com7fy8]

Jesus Himself taught that some "believe for a while" and then "fall away".

And James says ones can believe and so do the demons. So, possibly Jesus means ones who believe but not how the Holy Spirit renews a person to believe.

 

[com7fy8]

Jesus becomes our new inner Person > Galatians 4:19.

Actually, it is the Holy Spirit who seals and indwells the believer:
Eph 1:13,14 and Gal 3:2,5.

And our Apostle Paul says the Holy Spirit is transforming us into the same image as Jesus > 2 Corinthians 3:17-18. This changes our inner person so we are no longer like we used to be. Galatians 4:19 says Paul is laboring so Jesus will be formed in us. So, this is what I mean. The Holy Spirit forms Jesus in us, so we are in His image > "the same image".

And this keeps us from turning back and losing our salvation.

"Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord." (2 Corinthians 3:17-18)

So, yes the Holy Spirit lives in us, and because of this "Christ lives in me" > Galatians 2:20. Because the Holy Spirit is "the Spirit of Christ". (Romans 8:10)

 

[Radagast]

Such as the above verses.

Exactly so. Because, like I said, I'm a Calvinist.

"the Synod rejects the errors of those ... Who teach: That the true believers and regenerate not only can fall from justifying faith and likewise from grace and salvation wholly and to the end, but indeed often do fall from this and are lost forever. For this conception makes powerless the grace, justification, regeneration, and continued keeping by Christ, contrary to the expressed words of the Apostle Paul: 'That while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Much more then, being justified by his blood, shall we be saved from the wrath of God through him,' Romans 5:8-9. And contrary to the Apostle John: 'Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin, because his seed abideth in him; and he can not sin, because he is begotten of God,' 1 John 3:9. And also contrary to the words of Jesus Christ: 'I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand. My Father who hath given them to me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand,' John 10:28-29." (Canons of Dordt: Of the Perseverance of the Saints)

But I object to people giving bad reasons for true statements. And the incorrect statements about the periphrastic perfect were indeed bad reasons.

 

[Gr8Grace]

There is no such implication of extension into the future in the Greek perfect.

E. perfect: [R; per] Expresses the results of the action to continue to exist. "I have washed" The perfect tense may be represented by a dot and a line (•---------------).

Grammar information obtained from William H. Davis, Beginner's Grammar of the Greek New Testament and H. E. Dana and J. R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament.

A completed action(in the past) that~~"continue's to exist", "has ongoing results" Your trying to tell us that that isn't future?

 

[Radagast]

E. perfect: [R; per] Expresses the results of the action to continue to exist. "I have washed" The perfect tense may be represented by a dot and a line (•---------------).

That's what I've been saying.

"The Perfect represents a present state resulting from a past action" (Wenham, The Elements of New Testament Greek)
"This emphasis on the present state that exists because of a past action is the distinguishing feature of the meaning of the Greek perfect tense" (Penner, A Guide to New Testament Greek)

A completed action(in the past) that~~"continue's to exist", "has ongoing results" Your trying to tell us that that isn't future?

No, that is not future. With the perfect, these results continue to the time that the speaker is speaking (the tense does not imply that they will necessarily continue forever), and with the pluperfect they are only shown as continuing up to some time before the speaker is speaking.

Comments about the future in Greek are made using the future tense.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said:
"Jesus Himself taught that some "believe for a while" and then "fall away"."

And James says ones can believe and so do the demons.

Uh, no. James said that demons believe that "God is One". Just read v.19. James wasn't saying that demons believe in Jesus Christ as Savior yet aren't saved. Which seems to be the default understanding by so many.

There is no "faith" in James 2:19. Having faith is trusting, and saving faith is trusting in what Jesus said He did for mankind and what He promises to those who believe in Him for salvation (He gives them eternal life - John 10:28).

The demons believe that God is One because when they were all created, they LIVED with God. So they believe from experience. Not trust in what God says.

So, possibly Jesus means ones who believe but not how the Holy Spirit renews a person to believe.

No, not possibly. Not at all. When one believes in Christ for salvation, they are given the gift of eternal life, in John 10:28, and they are given the gift of the Holy Spirit, Gal 3:2,5.

We know the Holy Spirit is a gift from Acts 10:45.