1 Thessalonians 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Timothy Lawson tslawson1 at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 5 11:58:54 EST 2010

 

[] PIGNW – APOPIGNW [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 To All: At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA?  Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?  Personally, I would be happy for the timing to be definite, but, my reading of pages 358-9 on prepositions in Wallace’s GGBB has disturbed my conclusions. Please bear with me as I explain how I got to the latter conclusion of the above question: I view the PAROUSIA of Jesus as a durative event. In my view it is shorter than the PAROUSIA described by Israel P. Warren but longer than just the ERXOMAI of Jesus with power and great glory. The PAROUSIA would seem to be a “state”; whether of shorter or longer duration; rather than an “achievement” or “semelfactive” event. In my study of the PAROUSIA and the events connected with it, I note that EIS is uniquely used with PAROUSIA at 1Thess. 4:15. Now, as far as I can determine, only dependent verbal participles (circumstantial or adverbial) are grammatically subordinated to their controlling verbs (usually the main verb of the clause).  At 1 Thess. 4:15 hOI PERILEIPOMENOI is most likely an independent substantival participle and as such is not grammatically subordinated to the main verb of the sentence. It could also be a nominative absolute participle but this seems less likely.  Therefore, in the clause “hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU,” EIS would not be grammatically subordinated to the main verb of the sentence, but rather to the participle. Could the participle PERILEPOMENOI at 1 Thessalonians 4:15 be viewed as “stative” and if so, would it then, override the transitive force of the preposition EIS.  On how to identify a “stative” verb Wallace on pg. 412 of GGBB states: “The key is simple: The stative occurs either with the equative verb or one that in translation uses am + a predicate adjective.” [italics mine] So, if his observation that one could identify a Greek “stative” verb by its ability to be translated using “am” + a predicate adjective, then the following English translation would seem to allow PERILEIPOMENOI to be “stative.”: …we the living who are surviving [for the presence of the Lord…] I believe that “surviving” is in this instance a predicate adjective. In this instance, EIS might then be better reflected by the preposition “for” rather than “to.” Also, on page 369 of GGBB under heading A.) Basic Uses of EIS at usage # 8  Wallace indicates EIS could be used in place of EN with its various nuances. I.P. Warren translates EN TH PAROUSIA as “during” the PAROUSIA. This translation of EN is also allowed for in BDAG and Wallace. So I say all of the above to again ask this: If it is shown that at 1 Thess. 4:15, EIS is sandwiched between a “stative” governing verb and possibly even a stative prepositional object; which really would not necessarily influence the preposition; should it then, be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” less definite than might be allowed by the possible ramifications of the conventional translation using to/till/until/up to and viewing PAROUSIA as an “acheivement” (coming) rather than a “state”? T. Scott Lawson

 

[] PIGNW – APOPIGNW[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Mar 5 12:30:11 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> To All:> > At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? Text: 1Th. 4:15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· [TOUTO GAR hUMIN LEGOMEN EN LOGWi KURIOU, hOTI hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTAS·]I should say first of all that it is not our practice on to discuss doctrine as such; the passage you ask about is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, but our limited focus here is on elucidating the possibilities of understanding the Greek text.Note that EIS here is used with an article THN and then the noun PAROUSIAN. The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”> Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Timothy Lawson tslawson1 at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 5 13:00:23 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Conrad,  Sorry about the doctrinal discussion/implications. I thought it would help clarify my question.  You write:”I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.”I’ll admit that I’ve been getting that a lot, lately. You write: “The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”” I note that “left behind” could still be considered a predicate adjective in English. Thus …we the living who are left behind for/until – such- time – as the coming of the Lord… could still indicate that PERILEIPOMENOI might be “stative.” Are Wallace’s comments on determining a “stative” applicable here?  Also, it seems that you are indicating that “for” is acceptable; for whatever grammatical reasons that may exist; as a translation for EIS in this text. Am I correct? T. Scott Lawson  ________________________________From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>Cc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Fri, March 5, 2010 9:30:11 AMSubject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> To All:>  > At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? Text: 1Th. 4:15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· [TOUTO GAR hUMIN LEGOMEN EN LOGWi KURIOU, hOTI hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTAS·]I should say first of all that it is not our practice on to discuss doctrine as such; the passage you ask about is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, but our limited focus here is on elucidating the possibilities of understanding the Greek text.Note that EIS here is used with an article THN and then the noun PAROUSIAN. The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”>  Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Mar 5 14:29:29 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> Conrad,> > Sorry about the doctrinal discussion/implications. I thought it would help clarify my question. > > You write:> “I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.”> > I’ll admit that I’ve been getting that a lot, lately.> > You write:> > “The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.””> > > I note that “left behind” could still be considered a predicate adjective in English. Thus …we the living who are left behind for/until – such- time – as the coming of the Lord… could still indicate that PERILEIPOMENOI might be “stative.” Are Wallace’s comments on determining a “stative” applicable here?It seems to me that you are hung up on how the Greek is to be read in English, rather than upon understanding the Greek as Greek. What’s the reference for Wallace on ‘stative’ relative to PARALEIPOMENOI (it is PARALEIPOMENOI rather than PERILEIPOMENOI, isn’t it?)? It seems to me that EIS used with PARALEIPOMENOI implies as a sense for THN PAROUSIAN: “with a view toward, looking forward to” with THN PAROUSIAN as a terminal point of expectation.> > Also, it seems that you are indicating that “for” is acceptable; for whatever grammatical reasons that may exist; as a translation for EIS in this text. Am I correct?Don’t be so hung up on how to translate it — any number of English expressions might convey the sense here. The range of usage of EIS is really very extensive; I suggest you take a good look at the BDAG entry on this preposition.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> ________________________________> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 9:30:11 AM> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:>> To All:>> >> At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? > > Text: 1Th. 4:15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· > [TOUTO GAR hUMIN LEGOMEN EN LOGWi KURIOU, hOTI hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTAS·]> > I should say first of all that it is not our practice on to discuss doctrine as such; the passage you ask about is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, but our limited focus here is on elucidating the possibilities of understanding the Greek text.> > Note that EIS here is used with an article THN and then the noun PAROUSIAN. The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”> >> Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?> > I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.> > Carl W. Conrad

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Mar 5 15:00:46 EST 2010

 

[] Textual Criticism Books [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 On Mar 5, 2010, at 2:47 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > Okay,> > Rather than trying to translate it into English, let me ask, is PERILEIPOMENOI “stative” and if so does it override the force of EIS? I’m seeking only the possible nuance of the Greek and I’ll leave the implications of its translation into English alone.I asked for the reference in Wallace about PARALEIPOMENOI (again I ask, it is PARA- not PERI-, isn’t it?). I was trying to do a search through indexes in Wallace and couldn’t find what you’re talking about. A page number would help. > If I check BDAG it will only give me possible options for translating into English so I’ll leave that alone for a moment to concentrate on the flavor of the Biblical Greek.Frankly, that seems a rather cavalier attitude toward the function of BDAG. A really good lexicon is not a glossary for a suitable translation; it is a carefully detailed analysis of the usage of the word in question in a vast database of relevant texts. In this instance I would study the lengthy entry on EIS, NOT in order to find out how to translate it, but in order to understand how it is most likely to be used in a context including such an adjective with participial overtones as PARALEIPOMENOI.cwc> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 11:29:29 AM> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > Conrad,> > > > Sorry about the doctrinal discussion/implications. I thought it would help clarify my question. > > > > You write:> > “I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.”> > > > I’ll admit that I’ve been getting that a lot, lately.> > > > You write:> > > > “The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.””> > > > > > I note that “left behind” could still be considered a predicate adjective in English. Thus …we the living who are left behind for/until – such- time – as the coming of the Lord… could still indicate that PERILEIPOMENOI might be “stative.” Are Wallace’s comments on determining a “stative” applicable here?> > It seems to me that you are hung up on how the Greek is to be read in English, rather than upon understanding the Greek as Greek. What’s the reference for Wallace on ‘stative’ relative to PARALEIPOMENOI (it is PARALEIPOMENOI rather than PERILEIPOMENOI, isn’t it?)? It seems to me that EIS used with PARALEIPOMENOI implies as a sense for THN PAROUSIAN: “with a view toward, looking forward to” with THN PAROUSIAN as a terminal point of expectation.> > > > Also, it seems that you are indicating that “for” is acceptable; for whatever grammatical reasons that may exist; as a translation for EIS in this text. Am I correct?> > Don’t be so hung up on how to translate it — any number of English expressions might convey the sense here. The range of usage of EIS is really very extensive; I suggest you take a good look at the BDAG entry on this preposition.> > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > ________________________________> > From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> > To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> > Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> > Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 9:30:11 AM> > Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > > > On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> >> To All:> >> > >> At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? > > > > Text: 1Th. 4:15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· > > [TOUTO GAR hUMIN LEGOMEN EN LOGWi KURIOU, hOTI hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTAS·]> > > > I should say first of all that it is not our practice on to discuss doctrine as such; the passage you ask about is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, but our limited focus here is on elucidating the possibilities of understanding the Greek text.> > > > Note that EIS here is used with an article THN and then the noun PAROUSIAN. The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”> > > >> Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?> > > > I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.> > > > Carl W. Conrad> > > > > > Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

 

[] Textual Criticism Books[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Timothy Lawson tslawson1 at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 5 14:47:05 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Okay,     Rather than trying to translate it into English, let me ask, is PERILEIPOMENOI “stative” and if so does it override the force of EIS? I’m seeking only the possible nuance of the Greek and I’ll leave the implications of its translation into English alone.If I check BDAG it will only give me possible options for translating into English so I’ll leave that alone for a moment to concentrate on the flavor of the Biblical Greek.T. Scott Lawson________________________________From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>Cc: at lists.ibiblio.orgSent: Fri, March 5, 2010 11:29:29 AMSubject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> Conrad,>  >  Sorry about the doctrinal discussion/implications. I thought it would help clarify my question. >  > You write:> “I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.”> > I’ll admit that I’ve been getting that a lot, lately.>  > You write:>  > “The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.””> >  > I note that “left behind” could still be considered a predicate adjective in English. Thus …we the living who are left behind for/until – such- time – as the coming of the Lord… could still indicate that PERILEIPOMENOI might be “stative.” Are Wallace’s comments on determining a “stative” applicable here?It seems to me that you are hung up on how the Greek is to be read in English, rather than upon understanding the Greek as Greek. What’s the reference for Wallace on ‘stative’ relative to PARALEIPOMENOI (it is PARALEIPOMENOI rather than PERILEIPOMENOI, isn’t it?)? It seems to me that EIS used with PARALEIPOMENOI implies as a sense for THN PAROUSIAN: “with a view toward, looking forward to” with THN PAROUSIAN as a terminal point of expectation.>  >  Also, it seems that you are indicating that “for” is acceptable; for whatever grammatical reasons that may exist; as a translation for EIS in this text. Am I correct?Don’t be so hung up on how to translate it — any number of English expressions might convey the sense here. The range of usage of EIS is really very extensive; I suggest you take a good look at the BDAG entry on this preposition.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> ________________________________> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 9:30:11 AM> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:>> To All:>>  >> At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? > > Text: 1Th. 4:15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· > [TOUTO GAR hUMIN LEGOMEN EN LOGWi KURIOU, hOTI hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTAS·]> > I should say first of all that it is not our practice on to discuss doctrine as such; the passage you ask about is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, but our limited focus here is on elucidating the possibilities of understanding the Greek text.> > Note that EIS here is used with an article THN and then the noun PAROUSIAN. The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”> >>  Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?> > I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.> > Carl W. Conrad

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Mar 5 15:47:11 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 By error on my part, the last exchange took place initially off-list. I’m correcting that here, I believe, with Mr. Lawson’s consent.On Mar 5, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > Ah! Carl,> > I saw that you typed PARALEIPOMENOI but I assumed it was a typo on your part. You gave an accompanying bit of the text prior to your “typo” which shows it correctly as PERILEIPOMENOI.You’re right; the original text does have PERILEIPOMENOI> > PERILEIPOMENOI is not specifically discussed in Wallace. He does however, mention that the transitive force of EIS may be overriden by the “stative” nature of its controlling verb.(pg 359 paragraphs 2 and 3. He also briefly discusses how to determine that a verb is “stative.” (pp. 412-13) His method includes its ability to be translated into English with a be verb + a predicate adjective. This seem a bit strange to me and that is one reason I am seeking clarification on how to determine the “stative” nature of a Greek verb.That’s helpful — at least to know what Wallace statement you’re referring to. But on reading through what Wallace has to say here, it doesn’t seem to me that PERILEIPOMENOI is “stative.” Rather it seems to me it is strongly passive and that the EIS prepositional phrase has to be understood as qualifying it: “left behind for what?” “left behind for how long?” “left behind in expectation of what?” That brings me back to what I suggested at the outset: the “natural” way of understanding this is “left behind for/in expectation of the coming of the Lord.”> > I’m sorry if I gave the impression that I have a “cavalier” attitude toward BDAG. This is not the case. I was trying to understand your comment that I should not be so “hung up” on how to translate EIS. I’m vert interested in how it is used in this text and your comments either meant that I should stop pursuing this line of inquiry or you meant that I should seek to concentrate on the Greek nuances of the preposition. I had been told that the primary function of all lexicons is to give possible ways to translate their terms into the receptor language, rather than giving all its possible uses as may have been found in the lexicon of the minds of its original speakers/listeners.Your best guide to how EIS s used in this text has to be the careful analysis of the contexts in which EIS is used that may be similar to this usage in 1 Thess 4:15.To be perfectly honest, I think you were told the wrong thing about “the primary function of all lexicons.” I think that the primary function of lexicons is to set forth the usage of a word in the entire range of the contexts in which it is found in the language. It seems to me that you are describing a glossary, not a lexicon. A lexicon focuses precisely, I think, on what the word could havae meant to the minds of the original speakers/listeners.”> > T. Scott Lawson> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 11:54:22 AM> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > On Mar 5, 2010, at 2:47 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > > > Okay,> > > > Rather than trying to translate it into English, let me ask, is PERILEIPOMENOI “stative” and if so does it override the force of EIS? I’m seeking only the possible nuance of the Greek and I’ll leave the implications of its translation into English alone.> > I asked for the reference in Wallace about PARALEIPOMENOI (again I ask, it is PARA- not PERI-, isn’t it?). I was trying to do a search through indexes in Wallace and couldn’t find what you’re talking about. A page number would help.> > > > > If I check BDAG it will only give me possible options for translating into English so I’ll leave that alone for a moment to concentrate on the flavor of the Biblical Greek.> > Frankly, that seems a rather cavalier attitude toward the function of BDAG. A really good lexicon is not a glossary for a suitable translation; it is a carefully detailed analysis of the usage of the word in question in a vast database of relevant texts. In this instance I would study the lengthy entry on EIS, NOT in order to find out how to translate it, but in order to understand how it is most likely to be used in a context including such an adjective with participial overtones as PARALEIPOMENOI.> > cwc> > > From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> > To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> > Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> > Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 11:29:29 AM> > Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > > > On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > > Conrad,> > > > > > Sorry about the doctrinal discussion/implications. I thought it would help clarify my question. > > > > > > You write:> > > “I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.”> > > > > > I’ll admit that I’ve been getting that a lot, lately.> > > > > > You write:> > > > > > “The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.””> > > > > > > > > I note that “left behind” could still be considered a predicate adjective in English. Thus …we the living who are left behind for/until – such- time – as the coming of the Lord… could still indicate that PERILEIPOMENOI might be “stative.” Are Wallace’s comments on determining a “stative” applicable here?> > > > It seems to me that you are hung up on how the Greek is to be read in English, rather than upon understanding the Greek as Greek. What’s the reference for Wallace on ‘stative’ relative to PARALEIPOMENOI (it is PARALEIPOMENOI rather than PERILEIPOMENOI, isn’t it?)? It seems to me that EIS used with PARALEIPOMENOI implies as a sense for THN PAROUSIAN: “with a view toward, looking forward to” with THN PAROUSIAN as a terminal point of expectation.> > > > > > Also, it seems that you are indicating that “for” is acceptable; for whatever grammatical reasons that may exist; as a translation for EIS in this text. Am I correct?> > > > Don’t be so hung up on how to translate it — any number of English expressions might convey the sense here. The range of usage of EIS is really very extensive; I suggest you take a good look at the BDAG entry on this preposition.> > > > Carl W. Conrad> > Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > > > ________________________________> > > From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> > > To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> > > Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> > > Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 9:30:11 AM> > > Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > > > > > On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > >> To All:> > >> > > >> At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? > > > > > > Text: 1Th. 4:15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· > > > [TOUTO GAR hUMIN LEGOMEN EN LOGWi KURIOU, hOTI hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTAS·]> > > > > > I should say first of all that it is not our practice on to discuss doctrine as such; the passage you ask about is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, but our limited focus here is on elucidating the possibilities of understanding the Greek text.> > > > > > Note that EIS here is used with an article THN and then the noun PAROUSIAN. The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”> > > > > >> Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?> > > > > > I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.> > > > > > Carl W. Conrad> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > > > Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Timothy Lawson tslawson1 at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 5 16:06:22 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Ah! Carl,     I saw that you typed PARALEIPOMENOI but I assumed it was a typo on your part. You gave an accompanying bit of the text prior to your “typo” which shows it correctly as PERILEIPOMENOI.PERILEIPOMENOI  is not specifically discussed in Wallace. He does however, mention that the transitive force of EIS may be overriden by the “stative” nature of its controlling verb.(pg 359 paragraphs 2 and 3. He also briefly discusses how to determine that a verb is “stative.” (pp. 412-13) His method includes its ability to be translated into English with a be verb + a predicate adjective. This seem a bit strange to me and that is one reason I am seeking clarification on how to determine the “stative” nature of a Greek verb.I’m sorry if I gave the impression that I have a “cavalier” attitude toward BDAG. This is not the case. I had been told that the primary function of all lexicons is to give possible ways to translate their terms into the receptor language, rather than giving all its possible uses as may have been found in the lexicon of the minds of its original speakers/listeners. T. Scott Lawson________________________________From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>To: < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 12:00:46 PMSubject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15On Mar 5, 2010, at 2:47 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > Okay,>  >      Rather than trying to translate it into English, let me ask, is PERILEIPOMENOI “stative” and if so does it override the force of EIS? I’m seeking only the possible nuance of the Greek and I’ll leave the implications of its translation into English alone.I asked for the reference in Wallace about PARALEIPOMENOI (again I ask, it is PARA- not PERI-, isn’t it?). I was trying to do a search through indexes in Wallace and couldn’t find what you’re talking about. A page number would help.> If I check BDAG it will only give me possible options for translating into English so I’ll leave that alone for a moment to concentrate on the flavor of the Biblical Greek.Frankly, that seems a rather cavalier attitude toward the function of BDAG. A really good lexicon is not a glossary for a suitable translation; it is a carefully detailed analysis of the usage of the word in question in a vast database of relevant texts. In this instance I would study the lengthy entry on EIS, NOT in order to find out how to translate it, but in order to understand how it is most likely to be used in a context including such an adjective with participial overtones as PARALEIPOMENOI.cwc> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 11:29:29 AM> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > Conrad,>> >  Sorry about the doctrinal discussion/implications. I thought it would help clarify my question. >> > You write:> > “I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.”> > > > I’ll admit that I’ve been getting that a lot, lately.>> > You write:>> > “The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.””> > >> > I note that “left behind” could still be considered a predicate adjective in English. Thus …we the living who are left behind for/until – such- time – as the coming of the Lord… could still indicate that PERILEIPOMENOI might be “stative.” Are Wallace’s comments on determining a “stative” applicable here?> > It seems to me that you are hung up on how the Greek is to be read in English, rather than upon understanding the Greek as Greek. What’s the reference for Wallace on ‘stative’ relative to PARALEIPOMENOI (it is PARALEIPOMENOI rather than PERILEIPOMENOI, isn’t it?)? It seems to me that EIS used with PARALEIPOMENOI implies as a sense for THN PAROUSIAN: “with a view toward, looking forward to” with THN PAROUSIAN as a terminal point of expectation.>> >  Also, it seems that you are indicating that “for” is acceptable; for whatever grammatical reasons that may exist; as a translation for EIS in this text. Am I correct?> > Don’t be so hung up on how to translate it — any number of English expressions might convey the sense here. The range of usage of EIS is really very extensive; I suggest you take a good look at the BDAG entry on this preposition.> > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > ________________________________> > From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> > To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> > Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> > Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 9:30:11 AM> > Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > > > On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> >> To All:> >>  > >> At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? > > > > Text: 1Th. 4:15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· > > [TOUTO GAR hUMIN LEGOMEN EN LOGWi KURIOU, hOTI hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTAS·]> > > > I should say first of all that it is not our practice on to discuss doctrine as such; the passage you ask about is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, but our limited focus here is on elucidating the possibilities of understanding the Greek text.> > > > Note that EIS here is used with an article THN and then the noun PAROUSIAN. The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”> > > >>  Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?> > > > I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.> > > > Carl W. Conrad> > > > > > Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)— home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/ mailing list at lists.ibiblio.orghttp://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Timothy Lawson tslawson1 at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 5 18:14:17 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Carl,   I have noted in my researching the possibility that PERILEIPOMENOI as a “stative” verb that PERILEIPOMAI occurs only in the passive as is indicated by BDAG. I understand that only transitive verbs can be passives and evidently all “stative” verbs are intransitive. Is this line of reasoning helpful in ruling out PERILEIPOMENOI  as “stative” or are other forces at work that allow PERILEIPOMENOI  to be “stative” even though normally found in the passive? Can the passive voice of a governing verb override the transitive force of a preposition just as well as the “stative” nature of a verb? Do you have any observations on Wallace’s key to identifying a “stative” by being able to translate it with a be verb + a predicate adjective? There must be something that does not involve translating it into another language to help determine if it it is “stative”. I have found a series of questions to ask about English verbs that help determine if they’re “stative”. Perhaps the same can apply to Greek?Indeed, I will continue to look for other parallel uses of EIS.Scotty________________________________From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>Cc: < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 12:47:11 PMSubject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15By error on my part, the last exchange took place initially off-list. I’m correcting that here, I believe, with Mr. Lawson’s consent.On Mar 5, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > Ah! Carl,>  >      I saw that you typed PARALEIPOMENOI but I assumed it was a typo on your part. You gave an accompanying bit of the text prior to your “typo” which shows it correctly as PERILEIPOMENOI.You’re right; the original text does have PERILEIPOMENOI>  > PERILEIPOMENOI  is not specifically discussed in Wallace. He does however, mention that the transitive force of EIS may be overriden by the “stative” nature of its controlling verb.(pg 359 paragraphs 2 and 3. He also briefly discusses how to determine that a verb is “stative.” (pp. 412-13) His method includes its ability to be translated into English with a be verb + a predicate adjective. This seem a bit strange to me and that is one reason I am seeking clarification on how to determine the “stative” nature of a Greek verb.That’s helpful — at least to know what Wallace statement you’re referring to. But on reading through what Wallace has to say here, it doesn’t seem to me that PERILEIPOMENOI is “stative.” Rather it seems to me it is strongly passive and that the EIS prepositional phrase has to be understood as qualifying it: “left behind for what?” “left behind for how long?” “left behind in expectation of what?” That brings me back to what I suggested at the outset: the “natural” way of understanding this is “left behind for/in expectation of the coming of the Lord.”>  > I’m sorry if I gave the impression that I have a “cavalier” attitude toward BDAG. This is not the case. I was trying to understand your comment that I should not be so “hung up” on how to translate EIS. I’m vert interested in how it is used in this text and your comments either meant that I should stop pursuing this line of inquiry or you meant that I should seek to concentrate on the Greek nuances of the preposition. I had been told that the primary function of all lexicons is to give possible ways to translate their terms into the receptor language, rather than giving all its possible uses as may have been found in the lexicon of the minds of its original speakers/listeners.Your best guide to how EIS s used in this text has to be the careful analysis of the contexts in which EIS is used that may be similar to this usage in 1 Thess 4:15.To be perfectly honest, I think you were told the wrong thing about “the primary function of all lexicons.” I think that the primary function of lexicons is to set forth the usage of a word in the entire range of the contexts in which it is found in the language. It seems to me that you are describing a glossary, not a lexicon. A lexicon focuses precisely, I think, on what the word could havae meant to the minds of the original speakers/listeners.”>  > T. Scott Lawson> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 11:54:22 AM> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > On Mar 5, 2010, at 2:47 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > > > Okay,>> >      Rather than trying to translate it into English, let me ask, is PERILEIPOMENOI “stative” and if so does it override the force of EIS? I’m seeking only the possible nuance of the Greek and I’ll leave the implications of its translation into English alone.> > I asked for the reference in Wallace about PARALEIPOMENOI (again I ask, it is PARA- not PERI-, isn’t it?). I was trying to do a search through indexes in Wallace and couldn’t find what you’re talking about. A page number would help.> >> > If I check BDAG it will only give me possible options for translating into English so I’ll leave that alone for a moment to concentrate on the flavor of the Biblical Greek.> > Frankly, that seems a rather cavalier attitude toward the function of BDAG. A really good lexicon is not a glossary for a suitable translation; it is a carefully detailed analysis of the usage of the word in question in a vast database of relevant texts. In this instance I would study the lengthy entry on EIS, NOT in order to find out how to translate it, but in order to understand how it is most likely to be used in a context including such an adjective with participial overtones as PARALEIPOMENOI.> > cwc> > > From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> > To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> > Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> > Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 11:29:29 AM> > Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > > > On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > > Conrad,> > >  > > >  Sorry about the doctrinal discussion/implications. I thought it would help clarify my question. > > >  > > > You write:> > > “I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.”> > > > > > I’ll admit that I’ve been getting that a lot, lately.> > >  > > > You write:> > >  > > > “The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.””> > > > > >  > > > I note that “left behind” could still be considered a predicate adjective in English. Thus …we the living who are left behind for/until – such- time – as the coming of the Lord… could still indicate that PERILEIPOMENOI might be “stative.” Are Wallace’s comments on determining a “stative” applicable here?> > > > It seems to me that you are hung up on how the Greek is to be read in English, rather than upon understanding the Greek as Greek. What’s the reference for Wallace on ‘stative’ relative to PARALEIPOMENOI (it is PARALEIPOMENOI rather than PERILEIPOMENOI, isn’t it?)? It seems to me that EIS used with PARALEIPOMENOI implies as a sense for THN PAROUSIAN: “with a view toward, looking forward to” with THN PAROUSIAN as a terminal point of expectation.> > >  > > >  Also, it seems that you are indicating that “for” is acceptable; for whatever grammatical reasons that may exist; as a translation for EIS in this text. Am I correct?> > > > Don’t be so hung up on how to translate it — any number of English expressions might convey the sense here. The range of usage of EIS is really very extensive; I suggest you take a good look at the BDAG entry on this preposition.> > > > Carl W. Conrad> > Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > > > ________________________________> > > From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> > > To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> > > Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org> > > Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 9:30:11 AM> > > Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > > > > > On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> > >> To All:> > >>  > > >> At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? > > > > > > Text: 1Th. 4:15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· > > > [TOUTO GAR hUMIN LEGOMEN EN LOGWi KURIOU, hOTI hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTAS·]> > > > > > I should say first of all that it is not our practice on to discuss doctrine as such; the passage you ask about is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, but our limited focus here is on elucidating the possibilities of understanding the Greek text.> > > > > > Note that EIS here is used with an article THN and then the noun PAROUSIAN. The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”> > > > > >>  Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?> > > > > > I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.> > > > > > Carl W. Conrad> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Carl W. Conrad> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > > > > Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Carl Conrad cwconrad2 at mac.com
Fri Mar 5 20:18:08 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 On Mar 5, 2010, at 6:14 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> Carl, > > I have noted in my researching the possibility that PERILEIPOMENOI as a “stative” verb that PERILEIPOMAI occurs only in the passive as is indicated by BDAG. I understand that only transitive verbs can be passives and evidently all “stative” verbs are intransitive. Is this line of reasoning helpful in ruling out PERILEIPOMENOI as “stative” or are other forces at work that allow PERILEIPOMENOI to be “stative” even though normally found in the passive? Can the passive voice of a governing verb override the transitive force of a preposition just as well as the “stative” nature of a verb? > > Do you have any observations on Wallace’s key to identifying a “stative” by being able to translate it with a be verb + a predicate adjective? There must be something that does not involve translating it into another language to help determine if it it is “stative”. I have found a series of questions to ask about English verbs that help determine if they’re “stative”. Perhaps the same can apply to Greek?I really think that you’re wasting your time with that issue. The prepositional phrase EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU must function adverbially with reference to PERILEIPOMENOI. I think BDAG s.v. gets it in §2.a. α or β — probzbly α.> > > Indeed, I will continue to look for other parallel uses of EIS.Carl W. ConradDepartment of Classics, Washington University (Retired)> > ________________________________> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>> Cc: < at lists.ibiblio.org>> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 12:47:11 PM> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> > By error on my part, the last exchange took place initially off-list. I’m correcting that here, I believe, with Mr. Lawson’s consent.> > On Mar 5, 2010, at 3:22 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:>> >> Ah! Carl,>> >> I saw that you typed PARALEIPOMENOI but I assumed it was a typo on your part. You gave an accompanying bit of the text prior to your “typo” which shows it correctly as PERILEIPOMENOI.> > You’re right; the original text does have PERILEIPOMENOI>> >> PERILEIPOMENOI is not specifically discussed in Wallace. He does however, mention that the transitive force of EIS may be overriden by the “stative” nature of its controlling verb.(pg 359 paragraphs 2 and 3. He also briefly discusses how to determine that a verb is “stative.” (pp. 412-13) His method includes its ability to be translated into English with a be verb + a predicate adjective. This seem a bit strange to me and that is one reason I am seeking clarification on how to determine the “stative” nature of a Greek verb.> > That’s helpful — at least to know what Wallace statement you’re referring to. But on reading through what Wallace has to say here, it doesn’t seem to me that PERILEIPOMENOI is “stative.” Rather it seems to me it is strongly passive and that the EIS prepositional phrase has to be understood as qualifying it: “left behind for what?” “left behind for how long?” “left behind in expectation of what?” That brings me back to what I suggested at the outset: the “natural” way of understanding this is “left behind for/in expectation of the coming of the Lord.”> >> >> I’m sorry if I gave the impression that I have a “cavalier” attitude toward BDAG. This is not the case. I was trying to understand your comment that I should not be so “hung up” on how to translate EIS. I’m vert interested in how it is used in this text and your comments either meant that I should stop pursuing this line of inquiry or you meant that I should seek to concentrate on the Greek nuances of the preposition. I had been told that the primary function of all lexicons is to give possible ways to translate their terms into the receptor language, rather than giving all its possible uses as may have been found in the lexicon of the minds of its original speakers/listeners.> > Your best guide to how EIS s used in this text has to be the careful analysis of the contexts in which EIS is used that may be similar to this usage in 1 Thess 4:15.> To be perfectly honest, I think you were told the wrong thing about “the primary function of all lexicons.” I think that the primary function of lexicons is to set forth the usage of a word in the entire range of the contexts in which it is found in the language. It seems to me that you are describing a glossary, not a lexicon. A lexicon focuses precisely, I think, on what the word could havae meant to the minds of the original speakers/listeners.”>> >> T. Scott Lawson>> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>>> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 11:54:22 AM>> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15>> >> On Mar 5, 2010, at 2:47 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:>>> >>> Okay,>>> >>> Rather than trying to translate it into English, let me ask, is PERILEIPOMENOI “stative” and if so does it override the force of EIS? I’m seeking only the possible nuance of the Greek and I’ll leave the implications of its translation into English alone.>> >> I asked for the reference in Wallace about PARALEIPOMENOI (again I ask, it is PARA- not PERI-, isn’t it?). I was trying to do a search through indexes in Wallace and couldn’t find what you’re talking about. A page number would help.>> >>> >>> If I check BDAG it will only give me possible options for translating into English so I’ll leave that alone for a moment to concentrate on the flavor of the Biblical Greek.>> >> Frankly, that seems a rather cavalier attitude toward the function of BDAG. A really good lexicon is not a glossary for a suitable translation; it is a carefully detailed analysis of the usage of the word in question in a vast database of relevant texts. In this instance I would study the lengthy entry on EIS, NOT in order to find out how to translate it, but in order to understand how it is most likely to be used in a context including such an adjective with participial overtones as PARALEIPOMENOI.>> >> cwc>> >>> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>>>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>>>> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org>>> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 11:29:29 AM>>> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15>>> >>> On Mar 5, 2010, at 1:00 PM, Timothy Lawson wrote:>>>> Conrad,>>>> >>>> Sorry about the doctrinal discussion/implications. I thought it would help clarify my question. >>>> >>>> You write:>>>> “I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.”>>>> >>>> I’ll admit that I’ve been getting that a lot, lately.>>>> >>>> You write:>>>> >>>> “The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.””>>>> >>>> >>>> I note that “left behind” could still be considered a predicate adjective in English. Thus …we the living who are left behind for/until – such- time – as the coming of the Lord… could still indicate that PERILEIPOMENOI might be “stative.” Are Wallace’s comments on determining a “stative” applicable here?>>> >>> It seems to me that you are hung up on how the Greek is to be read in English, rather than upon understanding the Greek as Greek. What’s the reference for Wallace on ‘stative’ relative to PARALEIPOMENOI (it is PARALEIPOMENOI rather than PERILEIPOMENOI, isn’t it?)? It seems to me that EIS used with PARALEIPOMENOI implies as a sense for THN PAROUSIAN: “with a view toward, looking forward to” with THN PAROUSIAN as a terminal point of expectation.>>>> >>>> Also, it seems that you are indicating that “for” is acceptable; for whatever grammatical reasons that may exist; as a translation for EIS in this text. Am I correct?>>> >>> Don’t be so hung up on how to translate it — any number of English expressions might convey the sense here. The range of usage of EIS is really very extensive; I suggest you take a good look at the BDAG entry on this preposition.>>> >>> Carl W. Conrad>>> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)>>> >>>> ________________________________>>>> From: Carl Conrad <cwconrad2 at mac.com>>>>> To: Timothy Lawson <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>>>>> Cc: at lists.ibiblio.org>>>> Sent: Fri, March 5, 2010 9:30:11 AM>>>> Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15>>>> >>>> On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:>>>>> To All:>>>>> >>>>> At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? >>>> >>>> Text: 1Th. 4:15 Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· >>>> [TOUTO GAR hUMIN LEGOMEN EN LOGWi KURIOU, hOTI hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTAS·]>>>> >>>> I should say first of all that it is not our practice on to discuss doctrine as such; the passage you ask about is certainly open to a variety of interpretations, but our limited focus here is on elucidating the possibilities of understanding the Greek text.>>>> >>>> Note that EIS here is used with an article THN and then the noun PAROUSIAN. The natural way of understanding PARALEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU is “left behind for/until-such-time-as the coming of the Lord.”>>>> >>>>> Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite?>>>> >>>> I think you are asking more questions than the Greek text will provide clear answers to.

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Iver Larsen iver_larsen at sil.org
Sat Mar 6 00:58:48 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] the easiest Greek audio ever produced in human history —– Original Message —– From: “Timothy Lawson” <tslawson1 at yahoo.com>To: “Carl Conrad” <cwconrad2 at mac.com>Cc: < at lists.ibiblio.org>Sent: 6. marts 2010 02:14Subject: Re: [] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15> I have noted in my researching the possibility that PERILEIPOMENOI as a > “stative” verb that PERILEIPOMAI occurs only in the passive as is indicated by > BDAG. I understand that only transitive verbs can be passives and evidently > all “stative” verbs are intransitive. Is this line of reasoning helpful in > ruling out PERILEIPOMENOI as “stative” or are other forces at work that allow > PERILEIPOMENOI to be “stative” even though normally found in the passive? Can > the passive voice of a governing verb override the transitive force of a > preposition just as well as the “stative” nature of a verb?—————IL:It is helpful to make a distinction between stative verbs and stative forms of a verb. Verbs can be put in different categories. Verbs of action, of motion, of description etc.But the perfect “tense” in Greek is often described as being stative, and that is something different.The verb PERILEIPOMAI is only used in the MP forms. Whether it is middle or passive is up to the context.It occurs two times in the NT, in 1 Thes 4:15 and 17. LSJ suggests: “to be left remaining, remain over, survive”.In 15, it is used in apposition to hOI ZWNTES, and in opposition to TOUS KOIMHQENTAS, and it refers to us who are left behind by death, i.e. we are still alive.15: ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθένταςhHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU OU MH FQASWMEN TOUS KOIMHQENTASEIS is simply up to the point of the PAROUSIA, and in this context similar to hEWS. We are still alive, not dead, going about our business until the event of the PAROUSIA.17: ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ κυρίου εἰς ἀέραEPEITA hHMEIS hOI ZWNTES hOI PERILEIPOMENOI hAMA SUN AUTOIS hARPAGHSOMEQA EN NEFELAIS EIS APANTHSIN TOU KURIO EIS AERAThen, we, the living ones, the remaining ones, will be caught up together with them (the raised dead ones from v. 16) in/by clouds to a meeting with the Lord in air.Being alive is a state, as is remaining or surviving. Notice that ZWNTES is a present form of a stative verb “to live, be alive”. I doubt that ZAW can occur in a perfect tense.(PERI)LEIPW (leave behind) is not in itself a stative verb, but the perfect tense creates a stative form of the verb. An MP form can have a similar effect of focusing on the state or result rather than the action.Iver Larsen

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] the easiest Greek audio ever produced in human history

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 Hedrick Gary GaryH at cjfm.org
Sat Mar 6 02:01:41 EST 2010

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15 [] Textual Criticism Books Some interesting ideas here. But I just checked A GRAMMATICAL ANALYSIS OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT from Editrice Pontificio Instituto Biblico in Rome (1996), hardly a bastion of doctrinaire dispensational rapturism, and they have eis as a temporal usage with the force of “until.” A literal rendering of the Greek clause could read like this: “… we the ones living [and] the ones remaining until the arrival of the Lord ….” To try to read more into it than that, it seems to me, looks a bit forced. Maybe thesis pressure?In classical Greek (Sophocles, for example, among others), parousia could be used in the sense of the first stage of appearance. That is, when an orator made an appearance, the audience’s first sight of him was the parousia. Arndt & Gingrich cite this nuance of the term in their lexicon of the GNT (pp. 629-30). This could also be germane to a correct understanding of Paul’s meaning in this text.Gary HedrickOn Mar 5, 2010, at 10:58 AM, Timothy Lawson wrote:> To All:> > At 1 Thessalonians 4:15 Paul connects the timing of the so called “rapture” to the PAROUSIA. What inferences can be drawn, as regards timing, by Paul’s unique use of the preposition EIS with PAROUSIA? > > Should EIS be translated as “to,” “till,” “until” or “up to” and thus convey the idea that the “rapture” event could be expected early in the PAROUSIA or, should it be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” indefinite? > > Personally, I would be happy for the timing to be definite, but, my reading of pages 358-9 on prepositions in Wallace’s GGBB has disturbed my conclusions. Please bear with me as I explain how I got to the latter conclusion of the above question:> > I view the PAROUSIA of Jesus as a durative event. In my view it is shorter than the PAROUSIA described by Israel P. Warren but longer than just the ERXOMAI of Jesus with power and great glory. The PAROUSIA would seem to be a “state”; whether of shorter or longer duration; rather than an “achievement” or “semelfactive” event.> > In my study of the PAROUSIA and the events connected with it, I note that EIS is uniquely used with PAROUSIA at 1Thess. 4:15.> > Now, as far as I can determine, only dependent verbal participles (circumstantial or adverbial) are grammatically subordinated to their controlling verbs (usually the main verb of the clause). > > At 1 Thess. 4:15 hOI PERILEIPOMENOI is most likely an independent substantival participle and as such is not grammatically subordinated to the main verb of the sentence. It could also be a nominative absolute participle but this seems less likely. > > Therefore, in the clause “hOI PERILEIPOMENOI EIS THN PAROUSIAN TOU KURIOU,” EIS would not be grammatically subordinated to the main verb of the sentence, but rather to the participle.> > Could the participle PERILEPOMENOI at 1 Thessalonians 4:15 be viewed as “stative” and if so, would it then, override the transitive force of the preposition EIS. > > On how to identify a “stative” verb Wallace on pg. 412 of GGBB states: “The key is simple: The stative occurs either with the equative verb or one that in translation uses am + a predicate adjective.” [italics mine]> > So, if his observation that one could identify a Greek “stative” verb by its ability to be translated using “am” + a predicate adjective, then the following English translation would seem to allow PERILEIPOMENOI to be “stative.”:> > …we the living who are surviving [for the presence of the Lord…]> > I believe that “surviving” is in this instance a predicate adjective.> > In this instance, EIS might then be better reflected by the preposition “for” rather than “to.”> > Also, on page 369 of GGBB under heading A.) Basic Uses of EIS at usage # 8 Wallace indicates EIS could be used in place of EN with its various nuances.> > I.P. Warren translates EN TH PAROUSIA as “during” the PAROUSIA. This translation of EN is also allowed for in BDAG and Wallace. So I say all of the above to again ask this:> > If it is shown that at 1 Thess. 4:15, EIS is sandwiched between a “stative” governing verb and possibly even a stative prepositional object; which really would not necessarily influence the preposition; should it then, be translated as “for” or “during” the PAROUSIA and leave the timing of the “rapture” less definite than might be allowed by the possible ramifications of the conventional translation using to/till/until/up to and viewing PAROUSIA as an “acheivement” (coming) rather than a “state”?> > T. Scott Lawson> > > >> home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/> mailing list> at lists.ibiblio.org> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/> > Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.> Checked by AVG Free Edition.> Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.3/696 – Release Date: 02/21/2007 3:19 PM

 

[] Translating EIS at 1 Thess. 4:15[] Textual Criticism Books

People who read this article also liked:

[AuthorRecommendedPosts]

52 thoughts on “1 Thessalonians 4:15

    1. Link Hudson says:

      Sorry, II Thessalonians 1– typo when I was typing on the phone earlier.

      These verses:
      2 Thessalonians 1
      1 Paul, and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ:

      2 Grace unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

      3 We are bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is meet, because that your faith groweth exceedingly, and the charity of every one of you all toward each other aboundeth;

      4 So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:

      5 Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:

      6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

      7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

      8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

      9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

      10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

      11 Wherefore also we pray always for you, that our God would count you worthy of this calling, and fulfil all the good pleasure of his goodness, and the work of faith with power:

      12 That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you, and ye in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.

      Chaper 2
      2 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

      2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

      Why would the church be here to receive rest when Jesus comes back “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God”?

      If chapter 1 is about the pre-trib rapture, how is the passage consistent with the pre-trib theory? Why would Jesus be coming back with fire executing vengence on them that know not God if these people are supposed to enjoy a time of peace with the beast making a peace treaty with Israel.

      If chapter is about the second coming, why wouldn’t the ‘coming of our Lord Jesus Christ’ in chapter 2:1 refer to the same events described in chapter 1?

    2. Link Hudson says:

      Troy Day Why don’t you quote the poster you agree with and decipher what they are saying if you don’t think posters here will understand. A page of conflicting opinions is not a good answer. Kind of like saying, “See the Talmud.”

    3. 2 Thessalonians 2: 4. Verses three and four and several verses is talking about the revaluing of the antichrist. I don’t remember us talking about the antichrist. We mostly was discussing of Jesus coming in the air. He wouldn’t come all the way back to earth. That would be the Resurrection of the Saints. To meet Him in the air. I understood Link was calling it the second Coming of Christ. I was explaining. The first Coming. Was when He was born and grew up and died on the Cross for our sins. The Meeting Jesus in the air was not the second Coming. Because He is not Coming all the way to earth. But the Second Coming. Would be when He Comes Riding On White Horses. With the Saints Of God following Him on White Horses. When he comes to fight the war against Satan and ungodly people. And reign a Thousand years here on earth. But Satan will be bound that thousand years. But that’s what I considered the Second Coming. That’s the kind of thing I remembered discussing. I don’t know exalts what he didn’t agree with. Maybe he will remember. That’s how I understand the first and second Coming of the Lord.

    4. Link Hudson says:

      Louise Cummings Paul says the dead will be alive at His coming in I Corinthians 15. That happens when Jesus comes back in I Thessalonians, right immediately before the rapture.

      We know that Jesus will come back down to earth. Where does it say He will come partway down, then go back up, and then down again? If we know from the Bible He is coming down, and we rise to meet him, and He returns with His saints, doesn’t it make sense that we meet Him on the way down?

      Should we complicate the theory with things the Bible does not teach?

    5. That deals with the antichrist. But I believe the Church will be gone at that time. I gave him a Scripture, that talked about where the dead in Christ will rise first. And we which are alive will be Change , in a moment , in a Twinkling Of an eye. And be caught up together. To meet the Lord in the air. That would be what I would be called Pre Trib. That’s where I believe the church, will be taken up. To meet The Lord In The Air. Before the antichrist will or can , reveal himself.

    6. Link Hudson when Christ comes for the Church. And Christians. Meet Him in the air. We will be in Heaven with the Lord at least, seven years, while the Tribulations is going on here on earth. For at least seven years. Before Jesus comes back to earth, ridding on Whit Horse. And the Raptured Saints will be following Him on White horses. That’s the second Coming. That’s isn’t up and down. Up and down. He only came once as a baby, grew up up until He was in His Thirys , think around this 33 years old when He died on the cross. The raised up from the grave. The third day. And minister to His disciples about 40 days. Before He descended back to heaven. And has been there at least, 2,000 thousand years He will com back to earth again. , Ridding on white horse. And the Raptured Saints following Him. And He will bind the devil. And Jesus will rule a on earth at least a thousand years. We talked about so much. I don’t remember going 1 Cor. 15. You will have to tell me what it was about. But that time line between. Each thing , is not like up and down to me. You will have to explain. What you mean , again to me. I looked back. To read over the Scriptures. They was gone. I thought They must not have agreed. I couldn’t find it.i hope the other brother I was writing to. Understood.

    7. Before the Rapture. We are suppose to be preaching, trying to get people saved. It’s just like it is no. We are living now before the Rapture.so if The Lord doesn’t Change a lot of people. And they get saved. We are suppose to be praying Reading the Bible. Doing. All we can for the Lord. We

    8. Link Hudson says:

      Louise Cummings
      I Corinthians 15
      22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

      23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.

      His coming is the ‘parousia’. The rapture and resurrection occur when Jesus comes back.

      Where does the Bible teach that Jesus comes part-way back or comes back again and again after His ascension?

    9. Well you have to go back and see the chapter is talking about. Some didn’t believe Jesus was risen from them dead. Some still doesn’t. But Hr did. They are just saying if Christ didn’t rise from the dead. Erase 12 says some among you doesn’t believe in the The Resurrection Of The dead. The Sadducees, didn’t believe in the Resurrection Of The dead. They was explaining. If Christ hasn’t been Resurrected. How then can we be Resurrected. And if Christ hasn’t been Resurrected. Or Risen from the dead. Then our preaching is vain. In verse 15. Yea, we are being false witness of God. He goes on down to tell us. If Christ hasn’t been raised from the dead. Then we can’t be either. But Christ has risen from the dead. And we will be risen also. And after HE HAS RISEN. AND WE WILL TOO AT RESURRECTION DAY. WE ARE STILL WAITING for that to happen.
      Jesus told us we would have one. And I believe it will happen. Any day now.
      The Lord told us to be watching and praying.For in such an hour as we think not. He will come. If we are not watching and praying. We might not be ready. But that’s what that chapter is taking about. Verse 51. Proves that everyone will not be sleeping. In this case dead. But we shall be changed In a moment in the twinkling of an eye. At the last trump. For the Trumpet shall sound. And the dead shall be raised. Incorruptible. And we shall be changed For this corruptible , must put on incorruptible, and this mortal must put on immortaality. I can’t write it all. But in 1 sr Thessalonians. That’s when it says we will be caught up in the air. The rest of the Corinthians is explaining after Jesus Resurrection. He tells us how it will be if we believe in Christ. He tells us hoe it will be at the Rapture. Then Ge tells us verse 58. Tells us how to be living until His Rapture.

    10. I mostly read in 1 st Thessalonians. But if you want to go to 2 Nd Thessalonians. 2: 1. The first verse , Now we beseech you, Brethren, by the Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto Him. ( I think this phrase refers to the Rapture. Verse (2) as that Fay of Christ is st hand. ( I would think is after the Rapture ). Then verse (3) Let no man deceive you by any means, for that day shall not come, except there come a ( departure) or falling away first. ( I think it speakers of the Rapture, in essence , says the Second Coming cannot take place until certain things happen.). And the man of sin be revealed, the sin of perdition. ( this speaks of the antichrist, who must come upon the world scene before the Second Coming. (Verse 4) is talking about the antichrist when he appears.). But Jesus won’t come back to earth until the end of all the Tribulations. I don’t remember talking about both mixed. Some about things before Jesus comes. And some talks about the antichrist, during the Tribulations. I remember talking most about 1st Thessalonians. I guess the fourth chapter. Since it refers more about rising to meet Jesus in the air. That would be Pre Trib. I don’t remember is discussing 1 st Corinthians. But if he remembers it , I guess we did. I get to thinking faster than I can write sometimes. And mess up what I meant to be putting down. I’m trying to get better on that. Then I doubt if everyone agrees with me. But I do try to put it like the Bible says.

  1. Link Hudson says:

    Louise Cummings if Paul said something the coming of thebLord and our gathering to gether unto Him why would the day of Christ mean something other than that? What is the Biblical vasis for reading 2 events there?

    Why does Paul associate the gathering together with the coming of Christ if it occurs 7 years prior?

    Is there anything in the Bible that teaches pretrib to justify imterpreting the passage–rather unnaturally– through that theory?

  2. Troy Day says:

    Link Hudson I dont want to hijack your conv. with grandma I just want to point out that 1 Thes 4 is very very clear in the chronology of events and a total eschatological order 1 Thes 5 proceeds based on that order that Paul has established in ch. 4 so do 2 Thes 1-2 you can accept that or not but it is what the apostle Paul is saying And he knew his stuff having gone to the heavens and back Not sure how you know yours but it makes little sense

    1. Link Hudson says:

      I see you are almost making a point Troy Day, but are just a little short of communicating it, from my perspective, How does the order Paul lays out fit with the theory you hold to?

      II Thessalonians 2:1 also conveys an order– Jesus’ coming and our gathering together to Him. Why would pre-trib reverse that order and insert 7 years?

      Does ‘parousia’ just mean whatever pre-tribbers want it to mean, depending on the passage?

    2. Link Hudson says:

      Troy Day I do not see anything about Jesus taking the church up when He descends in I Thessalonians 4.

      Let us compare I Thessalonians 4 with other scripture to determine what happens at the coming of the Lord:

      * The dead in Christ are resurrected and the rapture occurs.

      15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep.
      15 For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. 18 Therefore comfort one another with these words.

      * At the coming of Christ, the Lord consumes the lawless one with the breath of his mouth.
      II Thessalonians 2
      8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.

      * The sign of Christ’s coming and the gathering of the elect occurs AFTER the tribulation.
      29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

      Notice the things that occur at the coming of the Lord.
      – The rapture and resurrection
      – The Lord consumes the wicked one.

      (Quotes from NKJV)

    3. Link Hudson says:

      Troy Day Occam’s razor is not used in theology, but makes a valid point in this case, IMO. Since, at the coming of the Lord, the BIble shows us the saints will meet Christ in the air, and that at the coming of the Lord, the Lord will come with His saints, is there any reason to think that He will go ‘up’ instead of ‘down.’ Where is the scripture for that.

      Other scripture indicates that the Lord will destroy the man of sin with the brightness of His coming, and that when Christ is revealed, He will execute judgment on them that believe not. So why say Jesus is going up instead of down?

    4. Go back over that same Scripture in 1st Thessalonians read it all. I said in there verse 17. Will be the exact Scripture about the dead in Christ shall rise first. And we which are alive and remain , shall be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye. And we shall be caught up together in the air. That’s where it says we will meet Him in the air. If that isn’t correct. Then I will find where it says it. I know it’s in the Bible.

    5. Post Trib , you wouldn’t meet the Lord in the air. Post ztrib. You would have to go up and come right back down. You are reading in the fifth Chapter. Whet the Lord told not to be confused or worried. They was worried about the ones who died.I will have to read the chapter. Before completely explaining it. But I will tell you start reading at verse nine. And you will see the difference. How Jesus explains it to them.

    6. Link Hudson says:

      Louise Cummings going up and roght back down makes sense because the Bible nowhere says Jesus is coming back twice. Revelation does not have a pretrib rapture in it, just John being told come up hither.

      According to Paul, at the coming of the Lord the dead in Christ will rise first and we which are alive and remain will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air. But according to Paul also the man of sin will be destroyed by tge brightness of His coming so we should expect all that to happen at the same time.

    7. I read to you about the first catching away, if you don’t want to use Pre Trib. Go to Revelation 20: 5. It the rest of y dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. ( This pertains to all the unsaved, in fact all those who lived and died since the dawn of time. ). This is the First Resurrection ( proclaim that these two Resurrections is the way , Of
      The Unjust will be separated by 1 thousand years. ). My phone is messing up.

    8. Link Hudson says:

      Louise Cummings Wouldn’t you interpret the following passage, which occurs before the reference to the ‘first resurection’ to be about the second coming?

      Revelation 19
      11 Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. 12 His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself. 13 He is clothed in a robe dipped in[b] blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. 14 And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. 15 From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule[c] them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. 16 On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.
      (ESV)

      The more I read these scriptures, the more convinced I am that pre-trib is wrong.

  3. Link Hudson anytime you see gathering together. In the Bible. It’s almost , if not every time, referring to the catching away or the Rapture. The Fay of the Lord. If you will notice , it’s almost , or if not every time. It’s referring to the end time. Or the Second Coming Of The Lord. Just notice it when you are reading about gathering together. Or The Day Of The Lord. I don’t know if I have ever noticed when it wasn’t. Then we search it out to , see if that’s what it’s talking about. Because it’s possible, sometimes it might not be. It’s a good way to study it out and see. And when they are talking about the antichrist. You know that’s Tribulations. And from studying the Bible. You know Jesus won’t come until the end of the Tribulations. So that’s easy to figure out. But study that out. I could be wrong. But I don’t think so.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.