This document analyzes biblical passages about Noah's flood and the coming of the Son of Man to determine what it means for some to be "taken" and others to be "left." It finds that the Greek words used have different meanings. Those "taken" are favorably received by Christ, while those "left" are abandoned and without forgiveness of sins. The author argues against views, like the Left Behind series, that interpret being "left" as having a second chance for salvation.

1. T A K E N A WAY O R L E F T B E H I N D ?
By
Colin T. Greenlaw, Jr.
Introduction
This study presupposes that the reader is a believer in the supreme authority and relevance of the
Word of God, the Holy Bible, to his or her life. And that the matters of sin and salvation have already
been defined; i.e., that the need for salvation is deliverance from the control of the fallen human
nature; that the remedy lies in the Incarnation of the Son of God who lived a sinless life and then
became sin for us, dying the death-penalty in our behalf so that we may become the righteousness of
God—apart from personal works to obtain that salvation.
This paper is also addressed principally to the Christian who wants to emulate the noble Bereans “in
that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether
those things were so.” Acts 17:11. It is therefore clear that while much we are taught should be
received gladly, there is also the injunction that we are to inspect the foundation of that teaching.
We find here the implication that there can be differences of opinion and that those differences should
not be summarily dismissed as criticism or condemnation. An open mind to the truth as it is in Jesus,
and a willingness to correction of mind (based upon a candid and clear explanation of that truth)
should characterize the attitude of all who seek harmony and unity within Christ’s church.
The Subject
There is today a popular series of books and movies on the subject of “Left Behind.” While no one
wants to be left behind when the lifeboat leaves a sinking ship, neither does one want to jump
overboard unnecessarily when, upon close inspection, the ship’s problem is completely repairable
with the resources at hand. Nor does one want to conclude in a superficial way that no problem really
exists—that the present condition will take those aboard safely to port.
And so we have today, in the Christian world, differing views based upon particular Scriptural
passages. This is deemed of extreme consequence, for eternal destiny is the issue at stake. While
many look to pastors, bishops, priests, rabbis, and doctors of various theological stripes to define their
creed for them, the choice comes down to, “Wherein lies my guarantee of salvation?” Certainly, for
the Christian, that can only be within the relationship to the Provider of salvation. He, the Lord Jesus
Christ, created all in the beginning (John 1:3;Colossians 1:16), sustains all (Acts 17:28; Hebrews
1:3), and applies His sacrifice for us on an individual basis (Philippians 1:6; Hebrews 10:19-25.)
Scriptural Focus
With reference to the latter texts, we find the expressions “the day of Jesus Christ” and “the Day
approaching.” We can also add “blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (I Corinthians 1:8).
Within this framework we are specifically targeting the passage found in Matthew 24:38, 39:
For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in
marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, And did not know until the flood came and
took them all away; so will also the coming of the Son of Man be. (NKJV)
We will make a side-by-side comparison with Luke’s account:

2. 2
And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: They ate, they
drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the
ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. . . Even so will it be on the day when the Son of
Man is revealed. Luke 17:26, 27, 30 (NKJV).
From within these parallel passages let us note three points:
I. There are the days of Noah (before the flood), and then the day. We have plural, then singular
forms. These have great significance.
II. The flood “took them all away;” and, “destroyed them all.” These are clearly parallel
expressions and therefore must have very similar meanings.
III. There is “the coming of the Son of Man,” and “the day when the Son of Man is revealed.”
These are also parallel expressions and must be carefully considered as equivalent.
Digging forTreasure
I. In Noah’s time there were 120 years in which he not only preached the day of doom, but
followed God’s instructions for his - man’s role - in riding out the storm. God gave Noah a
blueprint, and he followed it. These days of Noah were times of great decadence and hilarity.
People’s minds were engrossed with evil imaginings (Genesis 6:5), and so this strange notion
of a worldwide flood was simply incredulous.
Without the vital relationship to their Maker (which Enoch also had), the masses could not
begin to perceive, believe, or receive Noah’s proclamation. Just the building of the ark was a
condemnation of the then-world order (Hebrews 11:7). And so it will be in the days of the
Son of Man. The condemnation is to those who reject the word of the Lord, for that word will
condemn them in the last day (John 12:48).
We can conclude that the days alluded to regarding Christ’s coming are nearly identical in
moral depravity. We must note that there is also a message for deliverance from a coming
catastrophe. And that there are a people who are making every preparation according to
God’s plan. Noah could have tried to avoid all that intensive labor and reasoned, “Well, since
there are so few of us going to ride this out, let’s just get on this rubber dinghy. It will float
just fine. And God’s hand will be over us."
Wouldn’t that have shown great trust? Certainly neither faith nor obedience. And what must
be the application to our own plans and pursuits? What about our devisings to carry the
gospel to the world? What about our educational policies? Are we really leading our young
people to find their Creator; to equip them for Jesus’ kind of ministry; to place their
affections upon things of eternal value?
Within that perspective we must also examine any medical ministry for its efficacy in
directing all methodologies to the glory of God. If the Great Physician is not in charge and
being credited with His healing agencies, then we are frustrating His plan of salvation.
Therefore, in all this, we must focus not only upon the high degree of rebellion prevailing,
but look to the pattern and promises by which the faithful are preserved.
Zooming in now, we have the day that Noah entered the ark. On that day a door was shut.
Parallelism demands that the day when “the Son of Man is revealed” will also incorporate a
closure of great finality. The door of Noah’s ark was shut by a Divine hand, and no man
could open it. So it will be in that day when Jesus determines who is worthy to enter the

3. 3
kingdom of heaven (Matthew 7:21-23). Dr. Luke further clearly defines that day as the day of
judgment (Luke 10:12-14).
II. The flood a) “took them all away;” (Matthew) and b) “destroyed them all” (Luke).
The Greek work used here by Matthew is airo {ah'-ee-ro}. According to Strong’s
Concordance this word includes the following applications:
1. to raise from the ground, as to take up stones, or to draw up a fish.
2. to bear away what has been raised, carry off, to move from its place
3. to take off or away what is attached to anything, to remove
4. to take away from another what is his or committed to him, to take by force
5. to take from among the living, either by a natural death, or by violence
From the above we can see that “took...away” (in the context of punishment executed) means
that those not in the ark were borne away by the flood waters, caused to cease to exist.
. . .take him away, and cast [him] into outer darkness; there will be weeping and. . .Matt 22:13
. . .Satan comes immediately, and takes away the word that was sown in their hearts. Mark 4:15
. . . and from him who takes away your cloak, do not forbid [to take your] tunic either. Luke 6:29
And he said to those who stood by, Take the mina from him, and give [it] to him who has ten
minas. . . For I say unto you, That to every one who has will be given; and from him who does not
have, even what he has will be taken away from him. Luke 19:24, 26
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, Behold the Lamb of God who takes
away the sin of the world! John 1:29
Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away; and every [branch] that bears fruit, he
prunes, that it may bear more fruit. John 15:2
The above clearly defines the Greek word, airo {ah'-ee-ro}, to mean to sever something or
someone from an otherwise close relationship. That concurs precisely with Luke’s use of the
word “destroyed” (apollumi {ap-ol'-loo-mee} Strong’s: to put out of the way entirely, abolish,
to perish, to be lost, ruined, destroyed).
It is significant to note that in both Matthew’s and Luke’s narratives the Greek grammar is
identical, though using different words; i.e., the aorist tense, active voice, indicative mood.
The importance of this analysis cannot be overemphasized. Reasons for this are that our
choice of English words often cannot convey the same inflection as the Greek; translators are
influenced consciously or unconsciously by preconceived creedal concepts; or, the English is
simply limited in its choice of words to represent a similar thought.
Comparison Focus
Then two [men] will be in the field; the one is taken, and the other left. Two [women will be]
grinding at the mill; one is taken, and the other left. Matt 24:40, 41.
I tell you, in that night there shall be two [men] in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other
shall be left. Two [women] shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
Two [men] shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Luke 17:34-36.
For use of the word “taken,” it is interesting that Matthew uses the present tense, whereas Luke uses
the future tense of the exact same word, paralambano {par-al-am-ban'-o} (voice and mood are the
same in each). The usage of tense is important to recognize when we further pursue the duality of
Jesus’ prophecy, having application to both the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. as well as to the

4. 4
end times in which we live. These applications are based on Daniel’s prophecies (Matthew 24:15).
We are to study out the meaning of His Mount Olivet discourse for our present orientation as well as
our eternal benefit.
Here is the crux of the issue: Is the “taken away” of Matthew 24:39 the same as the “taken” in
verses 40 and 41? If we look merely at the English translation, it would appear to be so. However, we
must not be content with this limited (and at times superficial) examination for exegetical purposes. If
our doctrine—and therefore our performance deriving out of that doctrine—has any bearing on the
salvation issue, then we must exercise scholarly diligence (which is due) and go down to bedrock
analysis. And that is the purpose of this paper. That is the approach of this writer in his studies.
Again, is the “taken away” of Matthew 24:39 the same as the “taken” in verses 40 and 41? A most
resounding NO! The latter verses use an entirely different Greek word with a completely opposite
meaning! Is that evident from reading the English? Not in most popular translations. But here is one
refreshing difference:
and they did not know till the flood came and took all away; so shall be also the presence of the Son
of Man. Then two men shall be in the field, the one is received, and the one is left; two women shall
be grinding in the mill, one is received, and one is left. Matt 24:39, 40, 41 Young’s Literal
Translation (YLT).
The difference becomes clear, for the Greek word usually translated “taken” is here more accurately
rendered “received.” This word found in verses 40 and 41 is paralambano {par-al-am-ban'-o} to take
to, to take with one's self, to join to one's self; an associate, a companion (Strong’s); to receive near,
to associate with oneself in familiar or intimate act or relation (Zodhiates). To more fully define the
meaning of paralambano (as with any word in Scripture) we must evaluate its application in other
texts where it is employed. Here are a few:
Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: Matt 1:20 (KJS)
Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, Matt 2:13
. . . And many other things there be, which they have received to hold. . . Mark 7:4
And if I go and prepare a place...I will come again, and receive you unto myself... Jn 14:3
I declare unto you the gospel which I preached...which also ye have received . . .I Cor 15:1
As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, [so] walk ye in him. . . Col 2:6
Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved. . . Heb 12:28
We find that in all these applications there is a favorable reception of the object desired. Would we
want to interpret any of the above to mean taken into damnation? It is only where translators fail to be
consistent that we have paralambano perverted into the meaning of airo, “carried off” to some tragic
end. We also have to include in this analysis the Luke 17:34-36 verses (above) where one is “taken,”
(paralambano {par-al-am-ban'-o}, to receive near, to associate with oneself, to join to one's self).
So, if the one in the field and the one grinding are “taken” into an intimate personal relation with
Jesus Christ, then what does it mean to “be left?”
Judgment Focus
In the Left Behind series by Tim LaHaye, those not taken up in a secret rapture are left to a second
period of probation in which to surrender their lives to the Lord.
But does the Greek warrant such a conclusion? The Greek word here for “left” is aphiemi {af-ee'-ay-
mee} meaning to send away, to bid going away or depart; to send forth, yield up, to expire; to

5. 5
disregard, omit or neglect; to go way from one, to leave one by not taking him as a companion;
abandon, leave destitute.
Both Matthew and Luke use the same word to describe this “left” condition, and here, as with the
word “taken,” Matthew uses the present tense, while Luke uses the future tense. (Voice and mood
remain the same in both.) Again, let us arrive at definition by inspecting the usage of aphiemi in other
texts. The meaning of “omit or neglect:”
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees. . .without leaving the others undone. Matt 23:23
Nevertheless I have [this] against you, that you have left your first love. Rev 2:4
Some applications for the “putting away, to send forth:”
For this is My blood of the covenant, which is shed. . . for the remission of sins. Matt 26:28
Jesus, when he had cried out again with a loud voice, yielded up (released) His spirit. Matt 27:50
And He would not allow anyone to carry wares through the temple. Mark 11:16
So when they had brought their boats to land, they forsook all, and followed Him. Luke 5:11
Repent, and. . . be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. . .Acts 2:38
. . . that through this Man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins. Acts 13:38
In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.. . Eph 1:7
Now where remission of these [is], [there is] no longer offering for sin. Heb 10:18
We would not want to draw the conclusion that the forgiveness (or remission) of sins leaves those sins
in good standing. Nor can we draw out the meaning that while one is “taken” in close relation to
Jesus, that the one “left” has a good second option for salvation. aphiemi {af-ee'-ay-mee} means to
send away, to bid going away, to put away, or to depart. We have to let the original tongue deliver its
clear message without the hindrances and weights of interpretive translations—which then only leave
most congregants in muddled confusion.
And not only the average reader, but many who are trained scholars choose to cling to long-held
doctrine, without exercising the objectivity that honest research demands. This only further confuses
and misleads those under their leadership and sphere of influence.
This should suffice to bring us to the realization that those “left” in Matthew 24:40, 41 suffer the
same fate as those “taken away” in verse 39! Confusing? Only if we let the ambiguity of the majority
English translations lead us astray! They are “removed” in Noah’s day, and “put away” in the day of
final judgment. Let the meaning as defined by the writers of Scripture - and directed by the Holy
Spirit - convey the truth of the matter.
Those professors of the gospel who do not truly yield themselves to the direction of the Almighty,
find themselves “put away” by the declaration of Jesus:
The master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for [him], and at an hour that
he is not aware of, And will cut him in two, and appoint [him] his portion with the hypocrites: there
shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Matt 24:50, 51 (NKJV)
And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of
teeth. Matt 25:30
And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. Matt 25:46.
Here is a clear statement by a godly author embracing the correct rendering from the Greek:

6. 6
. . . The time of the judgment is a most solemn period, when the Lord gathers His own from
among the tares. Those who have been members of the same family are separated. A mark is
placed upon the righteous. "They shall be Mine, saith the Lord of hosts, in that day when I make
up My jewels; and I will spare them, as a man spareth his own son that serveth him." Those who
have been obedient to God's commandments will unite with the company of the saints in light;
they shall enter in through the gates into the city, and have the right to the tree of life. The one
shall be taken. His name shall stand in the book of life, while those with whom he associated
shall have the mark of eternal separation from God. Testimonies to Ministers, by Ellen G. White,
pp. 234, 235.
In the paragraph previous to the above, Luke 17:35, 36 (one taken, the other left) is quoted. This same
author further defines the harvest time (when the tares and wheat are separated by the reapers) as “the
end of probationary time.” Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 72. See also Revelation 14:15.
The Coming of the Son of Man
What can be more clear (from our opening Scriptures) than the fact that there came a day in which
God closed the door upon impenitent sinners. Their time of probation—in which to accept the gospel
of deliverance from sin —had closed. In the time of Noah that door was closed for seven days, and
the revelers knew it not until the waters fell.
In the time of Lot, messengers were on their way to pronounce doom, and, upon arriving, were
greeted with the same lust that was calling down their destruction. In spite of Lot’s faithful witness
with his righteous lifestyle for many years in their midst, they yet chose to seek perverted
gratification.
Our Scriptural passages then, in context, are declaring a time of judgment when probationary time is
closed. There is an inspection by God to make that assessment (Genesis 6:5; 11:5; 18:21). That is the
clear message by Matthew as well, starting with the marriage parable of chapter 22.
But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding
garment. . . and cast him into outer darkness. Matt 22:11, 13.
Christ’s woes upon the Scribes and Pharisees in chapter 23; His lament over Jerusalem (the one who
kills the prophets, and stones those who are sent to her); and that the stones of the temple would be
thrown down, not one left upon another—all declare that a period of probation would soon close.
The parable of the ten virgins (Matthew 25) where a door is shut at the wedding; the judgment on the
usage of talents (cast the unprofitable servant into outer darkness); the sheep separated from the
goats (those on the left hand, “Depart from Me you cursed. .”) — all these illustrations declare that a
period of probation would close.
As for the passage of Luke 17, the contextual meaning here is further clarified by the parable
immediately following (Chapter 18:1-8), which declares that God will avenge His own in a judgment
setting. Verse eight brings much clarity to the scene—more literally translated:
. . . Nevertheless, the Son of Man coming, will He then find the faith on the earth?
I say to you, that He will execute the justice to them quickly; but the Son of Man having come, shall
he find the faith upon the earth? Young’s Literal Translation.
In other words, there will be a paucity of the visible faithful upon the earth in the vital and final day
of inspection – even as Elijah complained to the Lord. . . “I alone am left, and they seek to take my
life,” 1Kings 19:10. But the Lord knows who and where each loyal follower is to be found.

7. 7
III. There is “the coming of the Son of Man” (Matt 24:37, 39), and “the day when the Son of Man
is revealed” (Luke 17:30). As stated before, and now reinforced by close analysis of the first
two points, these are parallel expressions and must be carefully considered as equivalent.
But of that day and hour no one knows, no, not even the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But
as the days of Noah [were], so also will the presence [coming] of the Son of Man be. 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, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away; so also
will the presence [coming] of the Son of Man be. Matt 24:36-39.
We must first clear up the ambiguity that clouds this term, “coming.” The Greek word in bold
above—as well as in verse 27—is parousia, meaning presence and should have been so
translated! The reason for this is that parousia (while it can mean a physical coming), has a more
incisive application. There are two defining elements here:
1. As we have shown, the context applies to a day of inspection, not a physical or “spirit”
movement.
2. The parallelism with Luke (and Mark 13) demands a consistent rendering. We must
also factor in other parallel components, such as “the parable from the fig tree.”
The one location where the physical Second Coming is directly referenced in each gospel (Matt
24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27) comes before the parable of the fig tree, and in each gospel
utilizes the Greek verb, erchomai, present tense, active voice. This word conveys a movement
from one place to another, not the “manifestation” connotation of parousia.
Moses entreated earnestly that the Lord would let him know who would go with him to lead the
people from Sinai. God’s answer was, “My Presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.”
Exodus 33:12-14. The Hebrew word here means, “Before, in the face of.” It was important to
Moses that other peoples recognize Israel’s distinctive selection as separate from all other
nations, by the grace shown them. He proceeded then to boldly ask to see God’s glory! The Lord
graciously arranged subsequently to pass by Moses, proclaiming the name of the Lord, His
character. Exodus 34:5, 6.
This Presence is also illustrated in the following texts:
And because he loved thy fathers, therefore he chose their seed after them, and brought thee out in
his sight [with His Presence, NKJV] with his mighty power out of Egypt; Deut 4:37 (KJS)
In all their affliction He was afflicted, and the angel of His presence saved them: in His love and in
His pity He redeemed them; and He bare them, and carried them all the days of old. Isa 63:9
Thou wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence [is] fulness of joy; at thy right hand [there are]
pleasures for evermore. Ps 16:11
Eschatological significance is demonstrated here:
Hold thy peace at the presence of the Lord GOD: for the day of the LORD [is] at hand: for the LORD
hath prepared a sacrifice, he hath bid his guests Zeph 1:7
Compare the above text with Matthew 22:1-14, Jesus’ parable of the wedding feast, the New
Testament application of that revealed to His prophet through the remainder of Zephaniah 1.
Luke’s choice of the word revealing (Luke 17:30) is the same word used in Revelation 1:1, an
apokalupsis of the work of Jesus Christ. This revelation is used in other practical and figurative
ways:

8. 8
Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall
not be known. Matt 10:26
That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed
our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? John 12:38
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men,
who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Rom 1:18
But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the
things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed [them] unto us by
his Spirit. . . . 1Cor 2:9, 10
Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed
by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 1Cor 3:13
That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom
and revelation in the knowledge of him: {in. . . or, for the acknowledgement} Eph 1:17
Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be
brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; {to the end: Gr. perfectly}1Pet 1:13
Yes, this apokalupsis is also used of the physical manifestation of Jesus Christ:
For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Gal
1:12
And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with
His mighty angels, {his. . . Gr. the angels of his power} 2 Thess 1:7
There is another text that will help us in this scenario, and that is II Timothy 4:1:
I charge [you] therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the
dead at His appearing and His kingdom; 2 Tim 4:1
BETTER: . . . who will judge the living and the dead both by His appearance and His kingdom-
This as well as verse eight both utilize the Greek word from which we get our English
“epiphany.” This “appearance” in both verses are in the setting of judgment. Paul writes that
he has kept “the faith” (Cf. Luke 18:8 above), and henceforth there is laid up for him the
crown of righteousness. This is effectually the same symbolism as the wedding garment of
Matthew 22 and the lamps with oil in the parable of the ten virgins, Matthew 25. They
represent the development of a Christlike character and its finality of choice.
TO BE CONTINUED, WITH ANALYSIS OF THE FOLLOWING INCLUDED:
Was there a coming of the Son of Man in Noah’s day? Peter says so in I Peter 3:19.
Also, we need to assess the conclusion in the parable of “one taken and the other left.”
And they answered and said to Him, “Where, Lord?” So He said to them, “Wherever the body [is],
there the eagles will be gathered together.” Luke 17:37