골로새서의 명령을 위한 동사의 시제 연구

Most New Testament scholars consent that the use of tense in the imperative mood delivers aspect rather than time or Aktionsart. In spite of such agreement, contradictory arguments appear concerning the precise function of its tense. Some scholars claim that the present imperative is more emphasized than the aorist imperative. In contrast, others argue for the opposite view that the aorist in the imperative mood indicates the urgency or solemnity: the action of the aorist tense is accentuated. By the investigation of the imperative in some Pauline letters such as Ephesians and 2 Timothy, it has become evident that the latter represents an appropriate explanation. Is this conclusion applied to Colossians, too? Colossians contains much more present imperatives than aorist imperatives as most of other Pauline letters. The ratio between present and aorist is 23:7 in the epistle. Besides, the aorist subjunctive occurs three times with mh, for prohibition. Does the aorist tense for commandment and prohibition indicate the urgency or solemnity in Colossians? This study scrutinizes the usage of the aorist tense for commandment and prohibition in Colossians in order to determine if the previous conclusion is also valid for the epistle. It demonstrates that the Apostle Paul employed the present imperative when 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 or the subjunctive mood for prohibition.