디모데후서에 사용된 명령법 시제의 이해

Abstract

Recently, most scholars agree that the tense of the imperative conveys aspect rather than time or Aktionsart. Nevertheless, the precise meaning of its tense is variously suggested by scholars. For instance, one scholar claims that the present imperative represents a more heavily marked tense and thus is more emphasized than the aorist imperative. In contrast, the other argues for the opposite view that the aorist in the imperative indicates the urgency or solemnity: the action of the aorist tense is accentuated. Which one is correct?Intriguingly, most Pauline letters contain much more present imperatives than aorist imperatives. The ratio between present and aorist is sometimes 41:2, or 8:0. This indicates that the emphasis can never be placed on the present form. Different from other Pauline Letters, however, 2 Timothy includes more aorist imperatives than present imperatives: 17:16. 2 Timothy,therefore, draws our attention due to the peculiar ratio between two imperative forms. The letter waits for the investigation concerning the usage of the imperative. This study scrutinizes the usage of the imperative in 2 Timothy in order to grasp its meaning and function. It demonstrates that the Apostle Paul usually utilized the present imperative if he had no special reason or intention. Only when he intended to make some points prominent or emphasized, he made use of the aorist form of the imperative.