8 Jody A. Barnard might also be considered: can the theory be falsified? Are there examples that are not explainable on the basis of the theory? Which contradict the theory?22 Decker’s comments are well observed and point towards a possible means of testing Porter’s proposal, namely, does the supposed promi- nence value of the different verbal aspects cohere with Lukan peaks and points of emphasis? In a personal communication from Professor Porter on this subject he noted that there are a variety of means by which prominence is indi- cated and stressed the importance of asking how aspect works alongside these other features. Thus, by taking note of more widely recognised and uncontroversial means of establishing prominence one can identify the most probable points of emphasis in Luke’s stories and observe whether Porter’s hypothesis conforms to the data or if the data offers examples which contradict the theory. In other words, is there an aspectual shift from perfective to imperfective or stative at prominent points in Luke’s stories? Every story has at least one climactic juncture, the point for which the rest of the discourse exists. Thus, identifying the peak of a story will provide a natural benchmark from which to test Porter’s proposal. The discipline of form criticism, which attempts to classify the subgenres within the gospels and establish the purpose for which they were pre- served, is a helpful place to start in this regard. Of special relevance to the evaluation of Porter’s proposal are the miracle and pronouncement stories since they both contain a fairly obvious climactic juncture. 3. Miracle Stories With miracle stories the focus tends to fall upon the supernatural act of Jesus and, in contrast to pronouncements, they are characterised by a lack of teaching material23. It has often been thought that they had an apologetic purpose and were used to establish the superiority of Jesus over rival supernatural powers24. Luke also seems to consider the successful R.J. Decker, Temporal Deixis of the Greek Verb in the Gospel of Mark with Reference 22 to Verbal Aspect (New York 2001) 61. D.L. Bock, “Form Criticism”, in D.A. Black and D.S. Dockery (eds.), New Testament 23 Criticism and Interpretation (Grand Rapids 1991) 182-83. S.H. Travis, “Form Criticism”, in Marshall (ed.), Interpretation, 156; cf. R. Bultmann, 24 History of the Synoptic Tradition, Translated by John Marsh (Oxford 1963) 368.