Returning to the Greek

[1424241]

This is a popular question from ET believers when discussing words like "Aion":
"Why does it seem like everytime you are presented with question about a verse in Revelation that seems to blatently support ET, you return to the greek as if you were attempting to re-translate the verse to suit your beliefs?"

What would your answer be. I mean, I try to see things from both sides of the table to be fair and open-minded, and it sounds exactly like something I would ask if I was an ET believer. Don't you believe you should get your beliefs from scripture, not scripture from your beliefs?

[SeekerSA]

Hi Aaron

It is one of the arguments when Revelation is taken literally and the everlasting question comes up.

The book of Revelation is opened with "to the 7 churches" and closes with "I have sent this to the 7 churches".  So in essence, the book was written to the 7 and no one else.

It is still valid today but like most scripture, true revelation and understanding comes by the Spirit and not by carnal understanding.

I just always ask, where do we draw the line between allegory, symbolic, past events, future events, current events, and literal.

The Orthodox have no problem seeing the beast of the sea as symbolic, yet see the mark and the Antichrist and false prophet as literal including the alleged fall of lucifer and the third and the lake of fire.

Revelation just cannot be understood carnally.  It needs to be revealed Spiritually, and most folk accept the rapture myths and ETM such as Hal Lindsay and Jack van IMPe's interpretation and OT parallels.

Trying to discuss the real meaning takes pages and pages of back-up.  The ET lot usually like sound bytes and Hal and Jack oblige them with this.

Maybe I should start writing ETM books, sure looks like there is a market for this nonsense in the States, anything to get warm fuzzies more entrenched, but I guess I am just to honest to do that.

Blessings

[pickr]

Don't you believe you should get your beliefs from scripture, not scripture from your beliefs?

Absolutely.

Yet, it is disingenuous of the believer in the doctrine of endless torment to single out universalism with such a charge, especially when it comes to objections over traditional translations of the word "aion" and its derivatives.

Look at all the unscritural gymnastics ETers frequently employ to let God "off the hook" for the endless torment at the center of their faith. (And it IS the center of the faith of many such believers.) The so-called "age of accountability" is my favorite among such head-scratchers.

But back to "aion" for a moment. The fact of the matter is that tradition's treatment of this word is the bedrock of ET doctrine. It absolutely MUST entail endlessness lest the entire doctrine crumble in light of the totality of God's word in Christ Jesus.

I would also challenge believers in the doctrine of endless torment to examine their own treatment of scriptures that clearly support the universality of Christ's atonement and God's will for His plan of salvation. From Genesis to Reveleation, God's will to redeem the world and reconcile the lost is proclaimed over and over and over again. So who is it really, I ask, who refuses to "get your beliefs from scripture, not scripture from your beliefs?"

Peace and blessings,

Andy

[SeekerSA]

Another favorite is the accusation that UR is all paths lead to God which is true but via Christ, when accused of this and the question of what about those who never heard viz 3rd word countries, then out they come with Romans 1 or say they will be judged by their own laws.

Now who is inventing what then? Us or them.

We say only via Christ and All knees will bow but after the bow, two roads, paradise or hell aka LoF.

They see the judgment as "OK you are here tell me why I should let you in?"  Then the blah blahs of what mighty works we did blah blah yada yada.  I mean get real, as if anyone will be able to stand in His presence.

The ones making the claims will be the religious, not the "unsaved" their mouths will be shut and they will likely be the sheep on the right hand and the pious religious on the left.

:BangHead: :talkangry:

[1424241]

I see them dodging verses like an agent in the matrix, but that's not to important to me. I know that they will either have ears to hear or they won't. Whether or not they are open-minded is not my responsibility, though. My responsibility is for my own ears, and so, if they are honestly confused about something that I've said, I feel that it's only fair for me to check what I've said to make sure it complies with scripture.

In comes the problem of only speaking one language. Although I do use tons of different lexicons and resources for my word studies, from which I have found out some pretty interesting things about a lot of words, I feel as if trusting the men who wrote the lexicons to translate a greek word is almost the same as trusting the KJV translators to do the same. Obviously, the lexicon writers aren't as tied to the ecclesiastical words as the KJV translators were, but in the same sense, I feel as if studying to shew myself approved unto God is going to be tough considering that for every opinion on a greek word, there seems to be at least one more opinion that is contrary to that.

My answer to this supposed problem that I've had is to simply use scripture to define itself. This seems simple enough, and that's what I've been doing. Therefore, I understand things better when it is in the form of many verses agreeing with eachother and only a few verses sticking out like a sore thumb. If God says He is love a million times, and then 3 or 4 times we see Him commiting hate crimes worse than Hitler's (at least Hitler let his victims die when he tortured them), obviously, I'm going to assume the problem is with the "hate crime" passages and not the "love" passages.

Yet still, after telling someone that aion/olam does not mean eternity, I find it difficult to use "His mercy endures forever" to prove that God's mercy will outlast anything else that might be "age-long". What are your thoughts on this?

[SeekerSA]

The single biggest problem is trying to get them to look past the word hell.  Most believe that Jesus spoke more on hell than any other subject, show them by a simple word search this is not true, then even show them hell is Gehenna, show them pics of what it looks like today, prove there is more about love and mercy, show them early church father's opinions, show them where the ET doctrine originated, show them fallacy upon fallacy, they ignore it.

I usually answer their questions with simple rhetorical ones.

The problem is, when you are dealing with a carnal mindset, deeper meanings and layers cannot be entered into as therein lies the treasure and that can only be revealed by the Spirit.

Many are in the process of coming out but for some the journey takes longer.  Even the fundies are slamming the TBN lot and that by en large is a step in the right direction.

I have met online people with UR revelation that do not even know what Universalism stands for so if they come to the conclusion on their own then this is not a man-made version.  I too needed little change in mindset as I always knew God to be a God of LOVE, nothing else.

Blessings

[1424241]

So, since we are on the topic of greek, has anyone here studied the word "pantote"?
_____________________
3842. pantote
pantote pantote pan'-tot-eh

from 3956 and 3753; every when, i.e. at all times:--alway(-s), ever(-more).

See Greek 3956
See Greek 3753
_____________________
3956. pas
paV pas pas

including all the forms of declension; apparently a primary word; all, any, every, the whole:--all (manner of, means), alway(-s), any (one), X daily, + ever, every (one, way), as many as, + no(-thing), X thoroughly, whatsoever, whole, whosoever.
_____________________
3753. hote
ote hote hot'-eh

from 3739 and 5037; at which (thing) too, i.e. when:--after (that), as soon as, that, when, while.
_____________________


From what I've noticed so far, the word is never used to describe fire, torture, punishment, pain or anything like that. It exists 38 times in the NT and is usually translated always. It seems to me that the word usually describes individual occurances, and not measures of time. For example:

John 18:20
Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever (pantote) taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always (pantote) resort; and in secret have I said nothing.

Jesus was not always teaching in the synagogue or else he would've had no time to do anything else, and the Jews were not always resorting, or else they would have had no time for anything else, like a job. It seems to me as if the word "pantote" usually means "reoccurring", but not "always occurring". This word sparked my interest when reading;

I Thess. 4:17
Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever (pantote) be with the Lord.

Thoughts, anyone?

[firstborn888]

I see them dodging verses like an agent in the matrix, but that's not to important to me. I know that they will either have ears to hear or they won't.

How true. With some people it's like: 'don't confuse me with the facts'.

- byron

[Pierac]

In comes the problem of only speaking one language. Although I do use tons of different lexicons and resources for my word studies, from which I have found out some pretty interesting things about a lot of words, I feel as if trusting the men who wrote the lexicons to translate a greek word is almost the same as trusting the KJV translators to do the same. Obviously, the lexicon writers aren't as tied to the ecclesiastical words as the KJV translators were, but in the same sense, I feel as if studying to shew myself approved unto God is going to be tough considering that for every opinion on a greek word, there seems to be at least one more opinion that is contrary to that.

Amen Brother!

http://www.teknia.com/index.php?page=bbgtextbook

Paul