Paralambanetai

[stunnedbygrace]

This exact Greek word is only used twice in the NT. Both times are in the verse ( in different gospels) about one taken and one left.

I don’t know Greek and am confused as to what the tag/suffix “etai” means.
I know what paralambano means but that’s not the word used. It’s paralambanetai.

I mean, it still means to come alongside and forcibly seize, but…

 

[stunnedbygrace]

I think it must mean something like…”to me…”? Just guessing.

 

[APAK]

This exact Greek word is only used twice in the NT. Both times are in the verse ( in different gospels) about one taken and one left.

I don’t know Greek and am confused as to what the tag/suffix “etai” means.
I know what paralambano means but that’s not the word used. It’s paralambanetai.

I mean, it still means to come alongside and forcibly seize, but…

παραλαμβάνεται (paralambanetai)....
'etai' is a verb suffix that makes the verb passive, indicates middle voice or 3rd person singular...

....like, to be taken/raised up/taken up, shall be taken, will be taken etc. it is actually of an Hebrew source...the French word 'être' comes from it..'to be' or 'being'

There are some translations into English of Matthew 24:40 for example that make it an active present tense verb, as in 'he is taken,' ....that is incorrect...

 

[Hidden In Him]

This exact Greek word is only used twice in the NT. Both times are in the verse ( in different gospels) about one taken and one left.

I don’t know Greek and am confused as to what the tag/suffix “etai” means.
I know what paralambano means but that’s not the word used. It’s paralambanetai.

I mean, it still means to come alongside and forcibly seize, but…

APAK is correct, STB. It's 3rd person indicative present middle of παραλαμβάνω.

So you understand, the word is actually used about three dozen times in the New Testament, it's just that it's only used in this particular declension twice. But so far as word meaning goes, it's largely the same as in the other instances, though the meanings of the word vary somewhat. Like other cognates, and the root word λαμβάνω itself, παραλαμβάνω can also be translated "receive," and is several times in the NT. But it can also be translated "Take alongside, take with, take to oneself" etc, so it depends largely on context.

Out of curiosity, why were you asking?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

I look up name meanings. It’s just my weird little thing, dunno. But for some reason it never occurred to me to look up Vladimir Putin.
Vladimir means ruler of the world or ruler of peace.
Putin means the way/on the way or road.
So…yikes…

 

[Hidden In Him]

I look up name meanings. It’s just my weird little thing, dunno. But for some reason it never occurred to me to look up Vladimir Putin.
Vladimir means ruler of the world or ruler of peace.
Putin means the way/on the way or road.
So…yikes…

Ok.

Given his long held habit of eyeing the Ukraine, you're apparently not the only one who's ever wondered about it.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

APAK is correct, STB. It's 3rd person indicative present middle of παραλαμβάνω.

So you understand, the word is actually used about three dozen times in the New Testament, it's just that it's only used in this particular declension twice. But so far as word meaning goes, it's largely the same as in the other instances, though the meanings of the word vary somewhat. Like other cognates, and the root word λαμβάνω itself, παραλαμβάνω can also be translated "receive," and is several times in the NT. But it can also be translated "Take alongside, take with, take to oneself" etc, so it depends largely on context.

Out of curiosity, why were you asking?

I don’t understand what that means, third person present middle. What does it mean?

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Fauci means maker of sickles. Like, for cutting down grain. Another yikes.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

It’s my thread so…I can ruin it. Lol.

 

[Hidden In Him]

I don’t understand what that means, third person present middle. What does it mean?

The 1st person is when the speaker refers to himself ("I was pleased with this or that"), the 2nd person is when the writer is referring to or addressing a person or people ("You should not have went"), and 3rd Person includes all that are not listed above ("He, she, it, they should have thought about things first.")

Present tense refers to something happening now, i.e. in the present.

Middle voice is hard to explain, because we don't have it in English. Essentially it is used when a subject is acting upon itself in some way ("He became a baseball player" or "He bettered himself"), as opposed to Active voice, where the subject acts upon someone or something ("He hit the ball"), or Passive Voice, where the subject is acted upon by something or someone else ("He was hit by the ball").

 

[Hidden In Him]

It’s my thread so…I can ruin it. Lol.

LoL!!

 

[stunnedbygrace]

The 1st person is when the speaker refers to himself ("I was pleased with this or that"), the 2nd person is when the writer is referring to or addressing a person or people ("You should not have went"), and 3rd Person includes all that are not listed above ("He, she, it, they should have thought about things first.")

Present tense refers to something happening now, i.e. in the present.

Middle voice is hard to explain, because we don't have it in English. Essentially it is used when a subject is acting upon itself in some way ("He became a baseball player" or "He bettered himself"), as opposed to Active voice, where the subject acts upon someone or something ("He hit the ball"), or Passive Voice, where the subject is acted upon by something or someone else ("He was hit by the ball").

Oh…so…being seized as done by someone else…presumably the same one who came along beside?

 

[Hidden In Him]

Oh…so…being seized as done by someone else…presumably the same one who came along beside?

Yes.

 

[Enoch111]

I mean, it still means to come alongside and forcibly seize, but…

And that is also what harpazo means. So both are applicable to the Rapture.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Yes.

This was an excellent post.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

In the present though.. it's not a passage speaking of the present..

 

[Hidden In Him]

This was an excellent post.

On occasion, I can be precise, LoL.

 

[Hidden In Him]

In the present though.. it's not a passage speaking of the present..

That's correct. The literal translation would be "one is being taken, and the other left." But since it is referring to a future event, they generally translate it like it's in future tense. The previous verb where it says "two men will be in a field" is future tense.

38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 40 Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

And this is what we don’t set a date on because no man knows when it will happen. But there surely will be men on earth in the tribulation who can come pretty darn close to being able to set a date for when Christ comes.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

Although… Paul said to the Galatians, remember, I told you, the man had to appear first…