I received an email about what could be the weirdest misuse of the aorist tense I have ever seen. They claimed that the aorist “having followed” in Matthew 19:28 describes a once for action that was eternally binding, and therefore Judas will be in heaven judging the twelve tribes of Israel. How do people come up with these things, and what lack of humility allows someone to make a claim about Greek that no grammar or commentary would allow?

Because Greek is an inflected language, words that go together don't have to be next to each other. It can make translation a little challenging, though, when you start reordering words and phrases to make sense in English.

In English, if we have Phrase A, Phrase B, and Phrase C, normal rules of grammar mean that Phrase C is related to Phrase B, and Phrase B is related to Phrase A. But that's not the way it is with Greek; Phrase C can go back to Phrase A. Romans 8:20 is a good example.

Sometimes just a little tweaking can make a helpful difference in a translation. In Romans 5:11 we can see how the CSB handles the article to reference back to a previous verse.

We used to teach that an imperative built on the present tense stem indicated an action already underway. This is most evident in prohibitions, for example, to tell a barking dog to stop. We know this is no longer the case, but it does surface from time to time in translations and commentaries.