Author Topic: Aionios: Let's clear the water  (Read 41544 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #225 on: January 28, 2009, 10:20:46 PM »
Quote from: Ron
As for your point about timelessness, I can see where if timelessness is something that by its nature, transcends time, yet, being a part of it, then yes, I can agree with that.


For Plato, time, like all things having to do with the created world, has its ontological basis in the eternal Forms.  So yes, his notion of eternity/eternal (aion/aionios) was that while it transcends time, it is also immanent in time just as the idea of "the good" is immanent in all things good.  I think this idea is retained in he NT, in that "aeonian life" refers to the eternal life of God as experienced in the world of time.  Hence, the literal meaning of "age"  is conveyed even though the connotations of eternity are still present.

  


Offline Doc

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 853
  • Gender: Male
  • Jesus Christ is the Savior of ALL men.
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #226 on: January 28, 2009, 10:21:31 PM »
Quote from: Ron
I'm using horizonal as the adjective for horizon, and the Hebrew idea behind the meaning for life was to have one's stomach filled. What one would call eternal life I would call horizonal filled-stomach

And what do you expect an English reader to make of your translation? :laughing7:

This is mainly for myself actually. I don't intend on selling it, but mainly to be used for anyone wanting to see the words from the Hebraic mindset. Of course as with anything new it will take getting used to. Because of it's very nature I do not see it, nor do I intend for it to be considered something everyone would want. But there are people who are interested in tracing the pictographic meanings of the words. That's all I'm trying to do. But to answer your question, most would probably take one look at it, think it wierd, and put it right down.  :laughing7:

Ron

This is an interesting way to look at it. With the connotation of the horizon being "as far as I can see", put together with "filled stomach". Then you could transliterate that concept of aionion/ aionios life as; "having your needs met/ "life" as far as is forseeable." I kind of like that, actually.  :winkgrin:
God does not instruct us to pray to change His mind. He wants us to pray so that we'll know His mind.
 
"Prayer doesn't change God, it changes me." --C.S. Lewis

God never had or needed a Plan B. He's still on Plan A.

Res Veritas Loquitur

Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #227 on: January 28, 2009, 10:23:46 PM »
Quote from: sven
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
as far is I know olam has the root of hidden/unseen and can literally be translated "hidden time", maybe the main contrast of aionios is not limited/unlimited duration, but visible/invisible?

It is certainly true that aionios is used in the Bible in reference to the Divine, which is described as invisible, intanible, incorporeal, permament, etc.

Offline legoman

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 907
  • Gender: Male
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #228 on: January 28, 2009, 10:29:02 PM »
Quote from: legoman
...just because "eternal" makes sense in some cases as a translation for aion/aionios, doesn't mean it is the correct translation.

No one here has argued otherwise.  My argument is that if aion/aionios does not convey the idea of endlessness in verses like John 6:27 and 6:51, where these words are used in contrast with the kind of life that perishes. 
...
That which is perishable can only logically be contrasted with that which is perishable.  Mortal life can only be logically contrasted with immortal life.


Hi Apo,

Yes I agree translation of language is very complex, and not always straightforward. But I don't see the problem of the logical "contrast" in the verses you point out.

Here are the verses [NIV]:

John 6:27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal [aionios] life, which the Son of Man will give you. On him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.

John 6:51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever (for the eons). This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."


I don't see it as a contrast between mortal life and immortal life.  I view it as a contrast between the physical and the spiritual.

Verse 27: Don't work for physical food that spoils, but instead for spiritual food - which will lead you to eonion life.  Likewise in verse 51 we learn that Jesus is the spiritual food that will give us life for the eons.

This is my understanding, and with this understanding, there is no confusion in using the words "age" or "pertaining to the ages".  Jesus is simply talking about the spiritual food (his body) that we must eat in order to gain life for the ages (the millenium and the remaining ages).

Perfectly fine and consistent IMHO.

Cheers,
Legoman

Offline Doc

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 853
  • Gender: Male
  • Jesus Christ is the Savior of ALL men.
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #229 on: January 28, 2009, 10:40:14 PM »
Quote from: legoman
...just because "eternal" makes sense in some cases as a translation for aion/aionios, doesn't mean it is the correct translation.

No one here has argued otherwise.  My argument is that if aion/aionios does not convey the idea of endlessness in verses like John 6:27 and 6:51, where these words are used in contrast with the kind of life that perishes. 
...
That which is perishable can only logically be contrasted with that which is perishable.  Mortal life can only be logically contrasted with immortal life.


Hi Apo,

Yes I agree translation of language is very complex, and not always straightforward. But I don't see the problem of the logical "contrast" in the verses you point out.

Here are the verses [NIV]:

John 6:27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal [aionios] life, which the Son of Man will give you. On him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.

John 6:51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever (for the eons). This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."


I don't see it as a contrast between mortal life and immortal life.  I view it as a contrast between the physical and the spiritual.

Verse 27: Don't work for physical food that spoils, but instead for spiritual food - which will lead you to eonion life.  Likewise in verse 51 we learn that Jesus is the spiritual food that will give us life for the eons.

This is my understanding, and with this understanding, there is no confusion in using the words "age" or "pertaining to the ages".  Jesus is simply talking about the spiritual food (his body) that we must eat in order to gain life for the ages (the millenium and the remaining ages).

Perfectly fine and consistent IMHO.

Cheers,
Legoman

Yes, and the Greek does already have words for incorruptible and imperishable that are more specific to those concepts than aionios/ aionion.
God does not instruct us to pray to change His mind. He wants us to pray so that we'll know His mind.
 
"Prayer doesn't change God, it changes me." --C.S. Lewis

God never had or needed a Plan B. He's still on Plan A.

Res Veritas Loquitur

Offline Tony N

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1631
    • Saviour of All Fellowship
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #230 on: January 28, 2009, 10:41:33 PM »
Dear Paul,
Gabe/Apo is advocating that context gives the meaning of aionion. He advocates that eonian is not eternal in some passages but when used of life it is eternal since it is the life of God (according to him).

But the problem with that is that it is the duty of the adjective to modify the noun. Gabe is reversing this law and making the noun or whatever modify the adjective. That's a big no no.

So legoman I think is refering to Gabe's position but I believe Gabe's position is concerning aionion, not aion.



But the assertion is valid only if aion can "only" mean age.


G165  aion  ahee-ohn'

from the same as G104;

properly, an age; by extension, perpetuity (also past); by implication, the
world; specially (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future):--age,
course, eternal, (for) ever(-more), (n-)ever, (beginning of the , while the) world
(began, without end). Compare G5550.



You can dispute the definitions if you like, that is your preogative,  but the aspect of ancient language translation is that we have found the best known "approximation"


The issue is if the spiritual nature of Gods Character love and righteousness is actually threatened by the use of either word,  or whether God intended for both perspectives to be given to us for a reason.

I contend that God gave them both for a reason because they both harmonize between the physical and the spiritual.

This has strengthened my faith because I am no longer threatened by the translation of either word.


As I asked previously


When will Gods corrective nature end?




Paul, I will boldly declare that in the New Testament aion can only have the idea of a time with a beginning and an end. It has no secret, spiritual, different meaning.
In the OT, it is difficult to put aion into every occurrence where olam is because in one verse it says that "God puts obscurity (olam) in the hearts of man so they can't find out what He is up to" (I can't remember exactly how it goes.
In the O.T. olam/aion is used for the duration of a generation. It is never used of no beginning and no end though. Never.

God will no longer need a correcive nature (made up theological term) when God is All in all (1 Cor.15:28).
Just because God says He will save all mankind
does not necessarily mean He won't.

Offline WhiteWings

  • Gold
  • *
  • Posts: 12654
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahshua heals
    • My sites
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #231 on: January 28, 2009, 10:42:34 PM »
Found this when searching for Olam:
Quote
The word aion has been used by Aristotle, Plato, and other Greek classical writers to mean "limited duration" and not "eternal."  There was one word used in classical Greek which was the closest to our English word eternity—and that word was aidios.  Aidios is found in only two places in the New Testament (Rom 1:20, Jude 6).  And in neither of these two cases are the Scriptures talking of man.  Jesus very carefully chose the word aion when talking about the future punishment of man.

He could have used the word aidios if He wanted to convey the idea of eternal.  But instead He chose to use a word meaning "age."


To Sven:
Quote
A note: It is thought that olam (owlam) was related to alam which apparently meant something like "to hide from sight". The idiomatic meaning of olam perhaps was "of long duration, so that the beginning or end of the matter cannot be seen" - on the relatively short, human point of view.
1 Timothy 2:3-4  ...God our Savior;  Who will have all men to be saved...
John 12:47  And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
Romans 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous ...

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #232 on: January 28, 2009, 11:02:17 PM »
Paul, I will boldly declare that in the New Testament aion can only have the idea of a time with a beginning and an end. It has no secret, spiritual, different meaning.


Ok.  that bold declaration doesn't change anything.



Quote
God will no longer need a corrective nature (made up theological term) when God is All in all (1 Cor.15:28).


Gods nature (whatever term you think is not made up) is to correct those he loves.  When God is all in all, that nature (whatever term you think is not made up) will not change.





Offline Tony N

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1631
    • Saviour of All Fellowship
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #233 on: January 28, 2009, 11:26:59 PM »
But the problem with that is that it is the duty of the adjective to modify the noun. Gabe is reversing this law and making the noun or whatever modify the adjective. That's a big no no.

But adjectives have a broad range of usage and meaning and it's the context that determines what is meant.

For example "lofty" means "high up" but there are many ways something can be high up.

1. physically high up
2. conceptually high up in a good way.
3. conceptually high up in a bad way.

- the lofty mountains overlooked the pristine lake.
- the studious young man had lofty apsirations for his life.
- the lofty looks of the wicked will be humbled.
 
loft·y (lôft, lf-)
adj. loft·i·er, loft·i·est
1. Of imposing height.
2. Elevated in character; exalted.
3. Affecting grandness; pompous.
4. Arrogant; haughty.

"Elevated in character" is far from "pompous" yet it's the context around "lofty" that determines which of these opposing ideas in intended.

Bob in your examples below:
- the lofty mountains overlooked the pristine lake.
- the studious young man had lofty apsirations for his life.
- the lofty looks of the wicked will be humbled.

neither "mountains" nor "aspirations" nor "looks" modify the adjective lofty. Rather, "lofty" modifies those nouns.

Just as the nouns in "beautiful boy," beautiful girl, beautiful horse, beautiful sun set do not modify the adjective "beautiful."

And neither does "God" in "eonian God" and "chastening" in "eonian chastening" modify the adjective "eonian."
« Last Edit: January 28, 2009, 11:40:36 PM by Tony N »
Just because God says He will save all mankind
does not necessarily mean He won't.

bobf

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #234 on: January 28, 2009, 11:40:34 PM »
Bob in your examples below:
- the lofty mountains overlooked the pristine lake.
- the studious young man had lofty apsirations for his life.
- the lofty looks of the wicked will be humbled.

neither "mountains" nor "aspirations" nor "looks" modify the adjective lofty. Rather, "lofty" modifies those nouns.

Then how is it that sense in which each noun is lofty is not the same in each phrase?

Offline Tony N

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1631
    • Saviour of All Fellowship
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #235 on: January 28, 2009, 11:46:38 PM »
Bob in your examples below:
- the lofty mountains overlooked the pristine lake.
- the studious young man had lofty apsirations for his life.
- the lofty looks of the wicked will be humbled.

neither "mountains" nor "aspirations" nor "looks" modify the adjective lofty. Rather, "lofty" modifies those nouns.

Then how is it that sense in which each noun is lofty is not the same in each phrase?


Each noun is lofty. The idea of "lofty" is already set in stone, so to speak.
The adjective modifies the noun. Look in any good grammar.
Just because God says He will save all mankind
does not necessarily mean He won't.

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #236 on: January 29, 2009, 12:10:38 AM »
In the OT, it is difficult to put aion into every occurrence where olam is because in one verse it says that "God puts obscurity (olam) in the hearts of man so they can't find out what He is up to" (I can't remember exactly how it goes.


Aion is not a part of the ancient Hebrew language.  Aion is an Ancient Greek word.  And there is my point.   If a person was to translate ancient hebrew into ancient greek then you would have to approximate the closest word, but you may not get it exact.  If there were people who still lived in a culture that readily used what "we" know to be Ancient Greek then those people might try to declare that OLAM must mean one certain word in their language and they would be in error.



Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #237 on: January 29, 2009, 12:50:03 AM »
Tony, no one here has suggested that the noun modifies the adjective.  Rather, when an adjective (or any kind of word) has more than one meaning, then we need to look at the context (such as the relevant nouns) in order to determine which meaning is in view.  This is elementary stuff, Tony. 

Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #238 on: January 29, 2009, 12:52:37 AM »
Quote from: legoman
I don't see it as a contrast between mortal life and immortal life.  I view it as a contrast between the physical and the spiritual.

Indeed, the contrast is between the physical and the spiritual, and we are told that the physical perishes as opposed to the spiritual which does not perish.


Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #239 on: January 29, 2009, 12:54:52 AM »
Quote from: doc
Yes, and the Greek does already have words for incorruptible and imperishable that are more specific to those concepts than aionios/ aionion.

And this means that aionios never carry these connotations? 

Offline Tony N

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1631
    • Saviour of All Fellowship
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #240 on: January 29, 2009, 12:59:18 AM »
Tony, no one here has suggested that the noun modifies the adjective.  Rather, when an adjective (or any kind of word) has more than one meaning, then we need to look at the context (such as the relevant nouns) in order to determine which meaning is in view.  This is elementary stuff, Tony. 

Gabe, you started this thread with this in italic:

"For we know that if the tent, which is our earthly home, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, aeonian in the heavens." - 2 Corinthians 5:1

Here aionios is used of the indissoluble things of Heaven in contrast to the things of the mundane world of corruption.


You are making the noun modify aionion/eonian. So in fact you are advocating that eonian can be modified by its context which is being modified by the noun it is supposed to be modifying. This is elementary stuff, Gabe.
Just because God says He will save all mankind
does not necessarily mean He won't.

Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #241 on: January 29, 2009, 01:02:31 AM »
Quote from: Tony
Each noun is lofty. The idea of "lofty" is already set in stone, so to speak.
The adjective modifies the noun. Look in any good grammar.

 :laughing7: You are a riot, man!

Tony, as bobf pointed out to you already, "lofty" carries the meaning of "pompous" and "tall".  You would like to think that "lofty" can only have one meaning, but you are clearly mistaken.  The truth is that context determines which meaning is in view, and in the examples bob used, it is the relevant nouns which indicate to us which definition is applicable.

Offline Tony N

  • Bronze
  • *
  • Posts: 1631
    • Saviour of All Fellowship
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #242 on: January 29, 2009, 01:06:04 AM »
Sorry Gabe but you are just plain wrong.

Lofty is already known what it is as to its meaning.

Attitude does not change the definition of lofty.
Mountains does not change the definition of lofty.

Lofty modifies the noun. period.
Just because God says He will save all mankind
does not necessarily mean He won't.

Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #243 on: January 29, 2009, 01:14:42 AM »

Quote from: tony
Gabe, you started this thread with this in italic:

"For we know that if the tent, which is our earthly home, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, aeonian in the heavens." - 2 Corinthians 5:1

Here aionios is used of the indissoluble things of Heaven in contrast to the things of the mundane world of corruption.

You are making the noun modify aionion/eonian. So in fact you are advocating that eonian can be modified by its context which is being modified by the noun it is supposed to be modifying. This is elementary stuff, Gabe.

 

Nouns don't modify context.  Nouns may help to determine context, however.  For instance, if I say "HIV infects a large number of gay males," I am clearly using the term "gay" as a synonym of "homosexual".  If, however, I say "Tony N. is a gay and cheerful man," I am using the term "gay" as a synonym of "happy"....unless there is something I don't know about Tony N.  :laughing7:



  

Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #244 on: January 29, 2009, 01:16:10 AM »
Tony, are you playing obtuse?

Lofty can mean "pompous".  It can also mean "tall".  "Tall" does not mean "pompous". 

Offline Doc

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 853
  • Gender: Male
  • Jesus Christ is the Savior of ALL men.
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #245 on: January 29, 2009, 01:39:35 AM »
Quote from: doc
Yes, and the Greek does already have words for incorruptible and imperishable that are more specific to those concepts than aionios/ aionion.

And this means that aionios never carry these connotations? 

Not necessarily; it just means that you have to do a lot more work to demonstrate convincingly that it does carry those connotations, let alone as a primary meaning. This can be especially difficult across culture and language barriers, particularly when there is a long gap of time to account for as well. My point in the comment you quoted was; why not use clearer words (because they were readily available) if there was a danger of the terminology being misunderstood?

As I'm sure you know, one of the problems with translation is that the translators not only have to pick the closest approximate word across languages (and sometimes it is very approximate); they also have to account for cultural differences and have a good handle on what the original author's intent was. Even with modern English, you can have two English-speaking readers read the same sentence and come away with different conclusions regarding what the sentence was conveying.

I guess my point is that connotation is much more difficult to prove than denotation, especially when we're dealing with something as fuzzy as eschatological words and terms can be. Plato was not a believer, so he may have used the terms somewhat differently than a biblical writer would have, particularly if he was one of the first to use that terminology. In addition, we all know that what we call mainstream Christianity today has been heavily influenced by pagan ideas throughout the centuries.

I mean, just look at the differences in scholarly opinion on the words aion, aionion and aionios. There is quite a bit of disagreement even among Greek scholars, who should theoretically know what they're talking about.
God does not instruct us to pray to change His mind. He wants us to pray so that we'll know His mind.
 
"Prayer doesn't change God, it changes me." --C.S. Lewis

God never had or needed a Plan B. He's still on Plan A.

Res Veritas Loquitur

Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #246 on: January 29, 2009, 01:44:52 AM »
Quote from: tony
Gabe, it is a fact that elohim can be gods.

Yes, I'm aware of that, Tony.  Thanks.

Quote
Furthermore I checked out your Exd.22:28; Lev.24:15; Mat.26:59-66; Jhn 10:33 and Acts 6:13 above and none of them prove that words can have opposite meanings.

You misunderstood. The TKS did not site those verses as examples where a word can carry opposite meanings.

Quote
1Ki 21:10  and cause two men--sons of worthlessness--to sit over-against him, and they testify of him, saying, Thou hast blessed God and Melech; and they have brought him out, and stoned him, and he dieth.'
 and two men--sons of worthlessness--come in, and sit over-against him, and the men of worthlessness testify of him, even Naboth, before the people, saying, `Naboth blessed God and Melech;' and they take him out to the outside of the city, and stone him with stones, and he dieth; (Young's Literal Translation)

You asked yourself why would they kill that guy for blessing God? They wouldn't have. But being a Jew, they would have killed the guy for blessing elohim (with a lowercase e and blessing Moloch (a false god)). They would not have  killed him for blessing God. And they would have killed the guy if he blessed GOD AND BLESSED MOLOCH (the false god). So either way, barach is not curse

Clark's commentary states:  "Moloch, Milcom, and Melech, in the language of different nations, all signify a king, and imply the sun, which was called the king of heaven; and consequently the addition of אדר  adar, which signifies powerful, illustrious, to the one, and of ענה  anah, which implies to return, to answer, to the other, means no more than the mighty or the oracular Moloch. And as the children were offered to him, it appears that he was the same with the Moloch of the Ammonites. See Univ. Hist. and Calmet. Mr. Locke is also of opinion that these two names were expressive of one and the same deity."


Tony, where are false gods mentioned in this context?  Elohim should have its usual meaning here.

Quote
The Bible is so against philosophy....

I do wonder what definition of "philosophy" you have in mind.  Philosophy in itself is not bad, or to be avoided, Tonester.  Indeed, Paul himself was a philosopher.

Quote
.... that by you saying that Plato influenced God's inspired word is so pathetic I hardly have words for your deception.


Ok, Tony.
Quote
The New Testament is a revelation from God, not Plato.

Did I say that the NT is a revelation from Plato? No, I didn't.  I merely acknowledged a fact that has been acknowledge for centuries, namely that Plato's philosophy (and that of other ancient Greek philosophers') had an influence on NT thought.  For instance, John's treatment of the Logos is decidedly Greek, as anyone familiar with ancient Greek philosophy will tell you. If this is news to you, then you ought to get out more.

Quote
Paul always warned the church against the philosophers. Read 1 Corinthians 1,2 & 3 and see what Paul says about the wisdom of the wise such as Plato and Aristotle.

The "wisdom of the world" does not refer to philosophy in general, or science in general.   You include all of Plato and Aritotle's philosophy in the category of the world's widsom, yet Christians throughout the ages have seen in them gems of God's wisdom.  
Quote
Gabe, why don't you just take the next step and say Satanists influenced the Bible?


Tony, remember what I told you about people taking you seriously?

Quote
Besides, Plato never used aion nor aionion for eternal.

Tony, you know you don't want to go there.  You refuse to address my points on this issue.  Let's see how well you can dance.

In Timaeus 37d, Plato contrast time (chronos), which moves according to number, with aion/aionios, whch rests in unity. Do you acknowledge this? Do you acknowledge that this same thought was expressed by Philo (the Platonist) when he wrote in De Mundo 7, "but in eternity (aion) nothing is passed, nothing is about to be, but it exists only" ?  Don't evade this any more, Tony.
 
Quote
Again, the adjective cannot be greater than the noun from which it is derived. I didn't make that rule up Gabe.


Again, this rule is broken routinely.  Gorgeous was derived from its nounal root, gorge ("throat").  Gorgeous does not mean "pertaining to the throat".  Sure, gorgeous now pertains to gorgeousness, but this is entirely irrelevant due to the fact that gorgeous is not derived from gorgeousness (in fact, its the other way around). Tony, do you get your kicks by making ridiculous assertions and then watching others invest time and energy refuting them?


« Last Edit: January 29, 2009, 02:04:23 AM by Apocatastasis »

Apocatastasis

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #247 on: January 29, 2009, 01:46:31 AM »
Quote from: doc
it just means that you have to do a lot more work to demonstrate convincingly that it does carry those connotations....
If it doesn't carry those connotations, then why is it used in contrast to that which perishes (John 6)?

Paul Hazelwood

  • Guest
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #248 on: January 29, 2009, 01:50:47 AM »
I mean, just look at the differences in scholarly opinion on the words aion, aionion and aionios. There is quite a bit of disagreement even among Greek scholars, who should theoretically know what they're talking about.


Here is the problem with that.

Here is the "approximation" you speak of.

G165  aion  ahee-ohn'

from the same as G104;

properly, an age; by extension, perpetuity (also past); by implication, the
world; specially (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future):--age,
course, eternal, (for) ever(-more), (n-)ever, (beginning of the , while the) world
(began, without end). Compare G5550.



The opinion isn't over scripture per sey,  it is the debate to narrow the above approximation so that it can be said with a sense of exactness what the language should say.  

So to say that exactness exists is an error.   When a person learns to understand "how" the approximation actually uplifts scripture, then there is no concern who has to win the debate over terms.


Offline Doc

  • 500
  • *
  • Posts: 853
  • Gender: Male
  • Jesus Christ is the Savior of ALL men.
Re: Aionios: Let's clear the water
« Reply #249 on: January 29, 2009, 02:08:53 AM »
Quote from: doc
it just means that you have to do a lot more work to demonstrate convincingly that it does carry those connotations....
If it doesn't carry those connotations, then why is it used in contrast to that which perishes (John 6)?

Hmm. I said, not necessarily, it just means you have to do a lot more work to demonstrate...

So where did I emphatically state that it doesn't carry those connotations?  :dontknow:
God does not instruct us to pray to change His mind. He wants us to pray so that we'll know His mind.
 
"Prayer doesn't change God, it changes me." --C.S. Lewis

God never had or needed a Plan B. He's still on Plan A.

Res Veritas Loquitur