7/30/2019 Aspect in Matt 5.1-11

1/1

Nick Elder

Aspect in Matt 5.1-11

Denver Seminary

There are at least two noteworthy observations regarding aspect in Matt 5.1-11.

The first concerns the consistent use of the so-called historical present and how thisdevice moves the narrative along. Matthew consistently uses the historical present in this

pericope to move the characters either to a new location or to shift focus onto the

speaking character. The second concerns the consistent use of future tenses in theintertexts that both Jesus and the devil evoke. Matthew has chosen to crop these texts

from Psalm 90 (LXX) and Deuteronomy so that the future tense is at the fore.

Verses 1-3 effectively establish the setting of the narrative. Here there is noforegrounded material as Matthew only uses aorist tense forms. While the setting is

significant narratively, the locus of meaning in the pericope is not primarily in these

verses. Matthew uses his first non-aorist tense form in verse 4, , to demonstrate

the significance of the intertexts in this section. Here, he moves from the consistent use of

the least-marked aorist tense to the most-marked perfect tense in his evocation ofDeuteronomy 8.3. The next verse contains the first historical present that is not in quoted

material. The historical present follows upon to move from thenarrative setting of the desert to the high point of the temple. Matthew again uses this

device to shift the narrative in verses 8a, 8b, 10, and 11. The use of the historical present

also occurs with the lexeme in verses 6 and 10. The effect in these verses is not to

move the narrative to a new setting, but to shift the focus onto the speech of the character(the devil in verse 6 and Jesus in verse 10).

In every instance that an intertext is evoked the perfect form is utilized.

This usage necessarily marks and foregrounds the evoked text. However, we ought to becareful in placing excessive weight on this markedness as is the standard

citation formula throughout the entirety of the New Testament. What points to the

markedness of these texts is the use of the future tense in each of them. This is likely the

organizing principle for the texts evoked. Every verb in these texts, with the exception of

in verse 6, is a future tense verb. It is probably important to note that while

is aorist in tense, it is subjunctive in mode, closely related to the future tense

in both form and meaning. What this does is set apart the intertexts. The back and forth

between Jesus and the devil using Scripture demonstrates not only Jesuss knowledge ofthe writings, but how they apply to him messianically.

In conclusion, the first three verses create a narrative setting for Jesuss encounterwith the devil. The historical presents function to move this narrative setting and

highlight Jesuss and the devils speeches. The future tense forms that dominate theSeptuagintal intertexts set them apart even more explicitly than the perfect tense forms

that introduce them.