Jody A. Barnard 12 grammatical subordination of these elements (κατέκειτο is introduced with a relative pronoun and δοξάζων expresses the manner in which the main verb ἀπῆλθεν is accomplished) this is unlikely. Alternatively, the imperfect tense (κατέκειτο) could have been selected because it conveys continuous action in the past, and the present tense (δοξάζων) because it conveys action concurrent with the main verb ἀπῆλθεν. Thus, a more traditional understanding of the tenses seems to make more sense in this instance. Raising the widow’s son (7,11-17) This pericope is widely recognised as a healing story, in which Jesus raises the dead after the manner of the prophet Elijah (1 Kgs 17,17-24)37. In the next episode (Lk 7,18-23) Jesus will inform John of his activities, and raising the dead is among them. Once again Luke seems to be presenting his stories as evidence that the Messianic manifesto is being fulfilled. Thus, the climactic juncture is reached at v. 15 when “the dead boy sat up”. Bock notes that the description of the boy as ὁ νεκρός “adds a note of contrast to stress the healing, since dead people do not usually move!”38. Once again the most prominent part of the story is reported with the aorist tense (ἀνεκάθισεν ... ἔδωκεν) whereas the introduction (vv. 11-12) contains the only occurrence of the perfect tense (τεθνηκώς), the so called “frontground tense”. Stilling the storm (8,22-25) This story is also widely recognised as a miracle story in form39, indi- cating that the main point is v. 24b when Jesus successfully commands the elements. This is confirmed by the plot in which the threat of perishing, because of the storm, is quite clearly the complication which is resolved by Jesus’ rebuke and the subsequent calm. But once again, this climactic event is grammaticalized in the aorist tense (ἐπετίμησεν ... ἐπαύσαντο καὶ ἐγένετο γαλήνη). Berger has offered an alternative analysis and suggests that this account is designed to inspire admiration40. This would push the focus of the story towards the final question in v. 25, where there is a tense shift from aorist to present. This could be taken as illustrative of Porter’s hypothesis, but, if this is the climax (unlikely), we must ask whether the Bultmann, History, 215; Marshall, Luke, 283; Bock, Luke, 1:648. 37 Bock, Luke, 1:652. 38 Bultmann, History, 215-6; Bock, Luke, 1:758. 39 Berger, Formgeschichte, 312, cited by Bock, Luke, 1:758. 40