The aorist here is usually translated as a present i.e. “I am well-pleased” and I’m trying to understand why.
Chapter 33 of CGCG says that aorist indicative in narrative texts is used to present the occurrence of actions in the past (past tense) and as single, completed actions without reference to duration or process (perfective aspect). Then it describes some exceptions e.g. ingressive, complexive, gnomic and tragic aorist. But none of these exceptions seem to apply here in Luke 3:22. Was there another kind of interpretation for aorists in Koine that allowed an aorist to sometimes be translated as a present? Or is this kind of interpretation something specific to the verb (ευ)δοκεω? Is there anything like this in classical Greek?
The relatively contemporary itala and Vulgate as well as the Gothic translated this aorist with a perfect (conplacui(t); sensi; genui) resp. a preterite (≈imperfect) galeikaida (A.pret.Ind.Sg.1 = i liked, began to like). In their opinion it seems this was not to be understood as a present meaning.
The Gothic galeikan possibly has an ingressive meaning: „I begin to like“ (at least according to Streitberg), The English dictionary of Balg doesn‘t mention this ingressive meaning.
@katalogon - Thanks for the article about performatives and tragic aorist. CGCG briefly discusses use of present tense (sec. 33.12n1) and aorist tense (sec. 33.33) in performatives and I think that’s probably what’s happening in this passage i.e. aorist is used to highlight the drama of the event. And as @jeidsath suggests the perfective aspect of aorist simply expresses God saying “I approve of what you just did” i.e. being baptized by John.
Hi, it might also be worth adding how this verb is treated in syntaxes of the NT. In Whitacre (2021), εὐδόκησα is specifically discussed in sec. 5.125: Global (Constative): Action Viewed as a Whole (the same verb taken from the Mark 1:11 quote). In sub-sec. (b), Whitacre notes that there are three interpretations of the aorist here:
(1) It falls under the usage: ‘Sometimes the global aorist is used for events viewed as a whole that continue up to the present, and the English perfect or present is used. This use differs from the perfect tense-form in that it does not include the idea of having reached a stage of completion in some sense as in the perfect’. He goes on to say that here, ‘The aorist is viewing the Father’s pleasure in the Son as a whole. Both the identification of Jesus as the beloved son and the context of Jesus’s baptism point to this aorist as not simply a statement about an attitude in the past, but one that continues to the present that grounds the launch of Jesus’s ministry’. This appears to be Whitacre’s own view, who gives other NT examples of the same usage.
(2) Whitacre notes in footnote 175 that ‘Fanning says that this is an example of the aorist used for a present stative idea, due to Semitic influence’.
(3) In the same footnote: ‘Alternatively, AGG sec. 199l take the use here as analogous to a gnomic aorist… see Luke 1:47 for a similar example’.
I don’t have any position on this, just thought it might be helpful to give you these quotes from the Whitacre syntax on my bookshelf.
“…the Aetolians first had to approve these [treaty elements]…”
It’s a clear aorist usage. There’s nothing of the Greek perfect about it. It’s a simple act. They need to sign off on the treaty.
If a parent tells his son, “good job!”, or a teacher a student, “I think you’re ready for the test!”, it’s a single simple act of approval, and the same seems to be the easiest interpretation of Luke 3:22 (who got the statement from Mark anyway).
