76 Paul Himes iterative by nature.” Hence in Luke 11,9, “It is not a single act that Jesus here enjoins, but action repeated staccato-like”9. J. H. Moulton concurs with Heidt on the supposed intensity of the aorist: “In the imperative therefore the conciseness of the aorist makes it a decidedly more sharp and urgent form than the present”10. Joseph Fantin likewise suggests that “the aorist is more likely to be used if urgency is demanded,” though Fantin qualifies that statement by suggesting that “it seems unwise to elevate these observations to the status of rules”11. In contrast, the present could be viewed as dealing with “general precepts”12. A. T. Robertson views the aorist imperative as punctiliar (citing John 2,19) while suggesting that the present imperative is “found to be regularly durative”; Robertson further cites John 5,8 as an example of how the aorist and present imperatives can differ13. Similarly, Friedrich Blass and Albert Debrunner make the general statement that the present imperative is “durative or iterative” while the aorist imperative concerns punctiliar action14. Others are a bit more cautious. William Morrice follows Moulton and Heidt in seeing in the present imperative the idea of continuously doing something, but notes that in certain passages, this distinction in aspect between Greek aorist and present imperatives seems to be disregarded in the New Testament. In particular, the aorist imperative is sometimes used where the present might reasonably be expected15. 9 Ibid., 255. 10 J. H. Moulton, Prolegomena (vol. 1 of Grammar of New Testament Greek; 3rd cor- rected ed.; Edinburgh 1949) 173. Yet in An Introduction to the Study of New Testament Greek (4th rev. ed.; London 1952) 193, he also notes that the aorist imperative can refer to “undetermined” action. 11 J. D. Fantin, “The Greek Imperative Mood in the New Testament: A Cognitive and Communicative Approach” (Ph.D. diss. Dallas Theological Seminary, 2003) 121-122. 12 Ibid., 121 and 123. Fantin suggests that “for the present tense (imperfective aspect), a focus upon the internal nature of all action leads itself to universal, customary, or progres- sive senses demanded by general precepts. This is in contrast to specific commands are [sic] narrow in focus and dependent upon the immediate circumstances” (123; Fantin cites Rom 12,14 as an example). 13 A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in Light of Historical Research (Nashville, Tenn. 1934), 855-856, 890. 14 F. Blass and A. Debrunner, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch (rev. F. Rehkopf; Göttingen 1976) 274 — “Der Imp.Präs. ist durative oder iterative, der Imp.Aor. ist momentan.” 15 W. G. Morrice, “Translating the Greek Imperative”, BT 24 (Jan 1973) 130. The reader will note how Morrice’s use of “aspect” seems to differ from that of other authors.