Aspect, Aktionsart, and Abduction: Future Tense in the New Testament 143 arguing on a morphological level, without the augment and using the same tense formative, the form of the Aorist Subjunctive is closer to the Future Indicative. Although in the works of some ancient writers the Aorist Indicative and Future Indicative seem to share the property of being indeterminate, the exact meaning of the ancient writers in this case is difficult to judge69. Campbell, who comes to the same conclusion with another line of argument, articulates well when he adds, “arguments from morphology and diachrony can only perform a confirmatory role”70. In his opening discussion on methodological considerations, Campbell argues explicitly the uniqueness of his approach from a methodological point of view. Calling some other approaches deductive and theory- driven71, he seeks to demonstrate that the aspect of the Greek verbal system should be determined by an inductive approach72. In contrast to the deductive method of reasoning, where a theory or a rule is hypothesized and then tested and confirmed with a selective set of available data73, he proposes a bottom-up approach, where the result is “recognized from the patterns evident within text rather than imposed upon it deductively”74. His approach is two-fold in practice: the selected text corpora are first investigated for discernable patterns of usage of every Indicative tense-forms in various strands of discourses75, and then these patterns are examined to uncover the aspectual value of each form. However, in dealing with the Future form, Campbell’s argument largely follows an unproven premise proposed by Mark O’Brien76. O’Brien’s work is mainly derived from a premise of Fanning. Fanning’s assertion is that the relationship and interaction between the aspect and procedural characteristic (i.e. Aktionsart) produces patterns that 69 R.I. Binnick, Time and the Verb: A Guide to Tense and Aspect (Oxford 1991) 20-4 and Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 139-40. 70 Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 140. 71 Following Evans and Olsen, Campbell criticizes Porter’s work as theory-driven. Refer to the following section on temporal reference of the Future. Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 153 n. 49. 72 Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 29-30. 73 Campbell claims that this approach is easier to conduct and is possible to come up with spurious conclusions, even calling such conclusions eisegesis. See his illustration of the aspect of the Perfect form. Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 29-30. 74 Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 30. 75 For example, 96.6% of the usage of Perfect in Luke is found in direct discourse, of which 21.6% are forms of οἶδα and 15% are Perfect of γράφω. Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 175-6. 76 From his unpublished Th.M thesis from Dallas Theological Seminary. M. O’Brien, “Verbal Aspect in the Future Tense of the Greek New Testament” (Th.M. Diss., Dallas Theological Seminary; Dallas 1997) 1-58, particularly 23-5. See also Campbell, Verbal Aspect, 140-51.