Bible translation: Ebonics and the aorist tense

Ebonics is the term for black English, what used to be called "Jive". The aorist tense is a verb tense that doesn't exist in standard English to indicate actions that are ongoing. "The river is flowing through the valley" gives an example of the sort statement that would be rendered in aorist, a river was flowing, is flowing now and will flow in the future. The NET bible has a great description of the aorist its notes:

The aorist tense is characterized by its emphasis on punctiliar
action; that is, the concept of the verb is considered without
regard for past, present, or future time. There is no
direct or clear English equivalent for this tense, though it is
generally rendered as a simple past tense in most translations.

The events described by the aorist tense are classified into a
number of categories by grammarians. The most common of these
include a view of the action as having begun from a certain
point ("inceptive aorist"), or having ended at a certain point
("cumulative aorist"), or merely existing at a certain point
("punctiliar aorist"). The categorization of other cases can
be found in Greek reference grammars.

The lack of this tense in standard English creates all sorts of mistranslation and misunderstanding issues when translating the bible.

Romans 6:8 Now if we have died (aorist) with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.

When did we die with him? At the time with of his crucifixion? Paul in Greek indicates it is an ongoing process we die with him at all time or outside of time, but this is not apparent in English. So why not borrow from Ebonics the aorist tense? They have one, and the dialect is understandable to most English speakers (even if it sounds less refined). To use it you use the verb to-be followed by an -ing verb. Many standard English speakers don't recognize this construction as being aorist but it is understandable and with very little effort they can learn the meaning with respect to time easily. In both standard English and Ebonics we do a similar thing with the verb "have" to adjust the temporal nature, so for example "had taken" is the past perfect for to-take in standard English. The past perfect indicates the "taking" happened at an indefinite time in the past and may be ongoing, as contrasted with "took" which is completed by the present.

I had taken (past perfect) the train many times.

I took (past simple) the train last week.

Using the Ebonics aorist tense will sound ungrammatical but it is accurate. The English reader can then identify the tenses in the Greek. So we would translate the above as:

Romans 6:8 Now if we be dying (aorist) with Christ, we believe (present simple) that we shall live (future simple) with him

This cuts into the snob appeal but frankly I think accuracy is far more important than snobbery. Anyone agree or disagree?

_____

After this post was made Sepia Mutiny (in a post entitled Brown Man's Bible) seemed to agree with this assessment in their review of the NCB.