Are Universalists right about aion?

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Craig, Satan was forbidden from seeking the body of Moses (letter/law ruling over  the flesh). What spirit is it then, that has you seeking it? Hereafter, we'll not know Him (Jesus the WORD made flesh) after the flesh, but after the Spirit. There is NO life in the scriptures themselves, the life is in the SPIRIT, and that Spirit opens the scriptures with the keys of David. You can't touch it, and you can't nail it to the cross again. What He said is evident all thru the scriptures. Blessings to all......

[firstborn888]

 I am wondering why noone has quoted this scripture to resolve this issue:

"When the trumpet of the lord shall sound and time shall be no more,
and the morning breaks eternal bright and fair,
when the saved of earth shall gather over on the other shore,
and the roll is called up yonder I'll be there"

I think it's Hym:101 (verse one) and it definitely states that there will be no more time and that an 'eternal' morning will break. Furthermore, this particular scripture was originally written in good 'ole English - so translation debates don't come into play here at all. Plus, the apostle Paul sang this song in prison, giving proof that it is part of the inspired canon.

- byron

 

[hopeful]

Plus, the apostle Paul sang this song in prison, giving proof that it is part of the inspired canon.

- byron

:thumbsup:  That's right, Byron!

If it was good enough for Paul and Silas
It's good enough for me!

:grin:

[joian]

Happy New Year All...........

Ahhh! Byron, the levity was too wonderful........LOL 

Enjoyed reading what has been shared.......Card, lead on your thoughts are higher yet and yes, Craig seems to bring them out........so it's all good, as a friend of mine says.

Joian

PS......Holly, good to see you on MyChurch.....didn't even realize it was you at first.......glad you will be sharing there.

[Craig]

I am wondering why noone has quoted this scripture to resolve this issue:

"When the trumpet of the lord shall sound and time shall be no more,
and the morning breaks eternal bright and fair,
when the saved of earth shall gather over on the other shore,
and the roll is called up yonder I'll be there"

I think it's Hym:101 (verse one) and it definitely states that there will be no more time and that an 'eternal' morning will break. Furthermore, this particular scripture was originally written in good 'ole English - so translation debates don't come into play here at all. Plus, the apostle Paul sang this song in prison, giving proof that it is part of the inspired canon.

- byron

You are correct, I have asked for Scripture to show this fact, if it really exists.

We have discussed Revelation 10, where it is a meaning without further delay, time is short, time running out, time nolonger, etc. does not mean time ends, but rather a statement of no further delay in the consumation of the mystery of God. Concerning the mystery of God, we have run out of time, time is nolonger, as it would be revealed.

Where is the Scripture you posted come from? Never heard of it.

When the trumpet of the lord shall sound and time shall be no more,
and the morning breaks eternal bright and fair,
when the saved of earth shall gather over on the other shore,
and the roll is called up yonder I'll be there"

Again this, in the context of the time, does not appear to say time nolonger exists but rather that which we have lived from past, present and future, shall no longer be.

Can we find any commentary prior to 1900's, which says that is what the passage/hymn meant so we can rule out the Anarchronism Fallacy of the space-time continuum?

[BenJasher]

PROBLEM VERSES WITH "AION"
by Don C. Hewey
                         Copyright © 1998-1999, "1john57.com" of KJV Apologetics. All rights reserved.  disclaimer
universal salvation main index
Universalists assume that "aion" is denoting "a period of time" or "an indeterminable amount of time."  If this is true, several problems are introduced and are contradictory to the attributes of the most High God.  Not to also mention, that acceptance of this definition for "aion" also contradicts and denies the universalist defintion of endless life.  How can we live endlessly with a God that is "temporarily" righteous, is not immortal, has no glory, is not wise, has no endless kingdom, and does not abide endlessly?
Let us examine some attributes of God within the context of the verse's with the word "aion" contained within these verses:
If and only if, "aion" is temporary then the following assumptions must be true

etc; etc; ad infinitum... 

It would be easy to say that anyone who would quote Don Hewey wasn't quoting much. I know Don rather well. He used to call me at my home and argue with me for 3 hours at a time. He would flood my forum with nonsense. I finally had to break off communication with him.

We need to be warned about people like Don Hewey. I mean that seriously. It makes no difference if you are ET, UR, or Partial Atonement; we need to avoid people like Brother Don. We all have our quirks and weakness of the flesh, along with a skeleton or two in the closet. But brother Don is different.

He considers himself to be a "Master Debater." But from what I experienced with him, his real purpose is to simply argue. You could prove your point was convincingly right and he would continue to ask you more questions than you can answer at one time. All he ever accomplished with me was waste bandwidth, and keep me distracted to such an extent that I couldn't get to other things I needed to get to.

But then I got to toying with him and he wasn't even mentally agile enough to catch on. I told him he would be a hoot at an upcoming New Year's Eve party. I said I had about 15 friends coming over on New Year's Eve, and he should come and discuss Eternal Torment with us. He called me on the phone a couple of days later to discuss the details. He was seriously considering coming to Northwest Arkansas from San Diego, California to speak at a fictitious New Year's Eve party. What a goob!

(Yeah, buddy! Come on out to N.W. Arkansas! We'll let you tell us that God hates His creation!)

Bottom line for me: I have nothing but pity for Don Hewey. I can't even give him the proper respect due a student of the scriptures. Because he isn't technically a student of the scriptures. All he is, is convinced. He is convinced he is right and everyone else is wrong. And talking with him on the phone I found him to be quite unpleasant. He was obnoxious, abrasive and belligerent, not to mention argumentative. If I wanted to talk to someone like that, I would talk to myself.

After my three hours on the phone with him, my inner "gut feeling" as that he wasn't even a Christian, but was an enemy of Christianity, and that his desire was to stir up dissension and confusion. He just wants to argue with someone about something. He has elected Christian Theology as his field of interest, and fixated on Universalism as the subject of his bile.

God help me if I am wrong in my assessment of him. But I don't think that I am. And I am serious about that.

[BenJasher]

And to all the brethren who were enjoying a few moments of Godly brevity, please accept my apologies for throwing a wet blanket.

[Craig]

It would be easy to say that anyone who would quote Don Hewey wasn't quoting much. I know Don rather well. He used to call me at my home and argue with me for 3 hours at a time. He would flood my forum with nonsense. I finally had to break off communication with him.

We need to be warned about people like Don Hewey. I mean that seriously. It makes no difference if you are ET, UR, or Partial Atonement; we need to avoid people like Brother Don. We all have our quirks and weakness of the flesh, along with a skeleton or two in the closet. But brother Don is different.

He considers himself to be a "Master Debater." But from what I experienced with him, his real purpose is to simply argue. You could prove your point was convincingly right and he would continue to ask you more questions than you can answer at one time. All he ever accomplished with me was waste bandwidth, and keep me distracted to such an extent that I couldn't get to other things I needed to get to.

But then I got to toying with him and he wasn't even mentally agile enough to catch on. I told him he would be a hoot at an upcoming New Year's Eve party. I said I had about 15 friends coming over on New Year's Eve, and he should come and discuss Eternal Torment with us. He called me on the phone a couple of days later to discuss the details. He was seriously considering coming to Northwest Arkansas from San Diego, California to speak at a fictitious New Year's Eve party. What a goob!

(Yeah, buddy! Come on out to N.W. Arkansas! We'll let you tell us that God hates His creation!)

Bottom line for me: I have nothing but pity for Don Hewey. I can't even give him the proper respect due a student of the scriptures. Because he isn't technically a student of the scriptures. All he is, is convinced. He is convinced he is right and everyone else is wrong. And talking with him on the phone I found him to be quite unpleasant. He was obnoxious, abrasive and belligerent, not to mention argumentative. If I wanted to talk to someone like that, I would talk to myself.

After my three hours on the phone with him, my inner "gut feeling" as that he wasn't even a Christian, but was an enemy of Christianity, and that his desire was to stir up dissension and confusion. He just wants to argue with someone about something. He has elected Christian Theology as his field of interest, and fixated on Universalism as the subject of his bile.

God help me if I am wrong in my assessment of him. But I don't think that I am. And I am serious about that.

Yea, anyone who builds their apologetics on a pre-supposition of either/or fallacy as Don has, makes it pretty hard to take him seriously.

[martincisneros]

PROBLEM VERSES WITH "AION"
by Don C. Hewey
                         Copyright © 1998-1999, "1john57.com" of KJV Apologetics. All rights reserved.  disclaimer
universal salvation main index
Universalists assume that "aion" is denoting "a period of time" or "an indeterminable amount of time."  If this is true, several problems are introduced and are contradictory to the attributes of the most High God.  Not

Just because God is the God of the ages doesn't prevent Him from being the God of eternity if there's stronger language in the Bible regarding His power.  However, "aion" is about the only term of duration used in the New Testament regarding punishment for sin.  There is no stronger language in the original languages of the Scripture to denote the perpetuity of punishments.  It's not there.  However, stronger language is used regarding the atributes, duration, glory, and power of God, of Christ, of the Holy Spirit, and of joint-heirs with Christ, otherwise known as "saints."  On that alone, you're only left with annihilation of the wicked or their restoration.  From there, you've got to look at what the clear promises of Scripture say, and though they mention destruction, they likewise point to a time beyond destruction when all who are destroyed will return singing the praises of God and of the Lamb.

If there's anything that Universalists are right about, it's "aion."  I've seen too many hundreds of pages of research over the last 7 years that all lead to the same conclusions when you examine the usage of "aion" from the 5th century B.C. to the 5th century A.D.  The idea of "eternity" first started entering into the lexicons in the 8th century A.D., and wasn't a dogmatism in the lexicons until the 16th century, when they nearly universally started asserting the duration of "aion" to mean everything from brief to endless.  The latin Church tended to focus on their latin translation and other latin writings, so that's when the idea of endless damnation was cultivated.  There is some dispute among scholars as to whether or not Jerome meant eternus to mean endless in the modern expectation of the word endless.

Many Universalists are wrong about many things, but they've got their scholarship down regarding the Universal Restoration, even if there's not perfect agreement on how exactly Christ has or will accomplish the biggest miracle He's ever performed thus far.  Sorta like how a good Baptist knows how to lead you to Christ with their 4-spiritual laws pamphlet, sinner's prayers, etc., etc., etc., and how certain strains of the Charismatic movement know perdy near everything that that Bible has to say about the power and use/abuse of words, UR folks know their stuff on how it's all going to turn out!

[Craig]

I have studied these words even before this was a problem or disagreement. All I can say is since the words are indefinite in their defining duration, we have all these disagreements on what it means.

Aion almost always refers to an fixed age of beginning and end. This is not to say God has a beginning and end, but rather He is the beginning and end of all things, therefore it is more abstract than concrete in it's understanding.

On the other hand, Aionios means it lasts as long as it lasts, so there is no guaruntee it ever ends except if there is any indication there is. This is not a contridiction. Forever, is a word in English, that can mean perpetuality or it could mean a very long time if it has an indication that it ends.

Many English authors use the word Forever in this manner. "I haven't seen you in forever." would mean you haven't seen the person in a long long time. On the other hand, "If you had a chance to win the lottery but burned your ticket, you lost that chance to win that lottery forever" would mean you perpetually have no more chances.

Even in English, all adjectives are limited to the noun they describe and can not surpass the quality of that noun. That is a big basketball, still refers to the size of a basketball, and reasonably, a basketball is not the size of the ever expanding universe. On the other hand, it could be 6' wide and tall, which is absurdly big for a basketball, or it could be just a few inches bigger than a regular basketball. A basketball must still posess the qualities that make it a basketball, regardless of it's adjective.

These facts of langauge and understanding seem to be clouded when speaking doctrine or religion in general. It is almost like people throw out common sense and general understanding when things like this come to light, and I have some idea why this is, but due to the fact some would take offense to my reasonings, I don't give them anymore. Language doesn't just stop obeying the laws of reason and logic and usage.

Just because God is the God of the ages doesn't prevent Him from being the God of eternity if there's stronger language in the Bible regarding His power. 

Right, because there are other words in the Bible which has stronger language than aion and aionios, which come right out and say it is He is perpetual in all things.

[WhiteWings]

I've tried to follow this thread, and am not so sure I fully understands all the arguments put forth.
Especially those of Craig. Therefore this a addressed to Craig. Of course anyone may answer :)
It's not meant as an argument either; but as a question (hopefully not quoted out of context)

but we speak the hidden wisdom of God in a secret, that God foreordained before the ages to our glory,  1 Cor 2:7 (YLT)
=> Here I read God created the ages (=time)
=> BTW that is in line with science that states that time started just after the big bang


And all these things as types did happen to those persons, and they were written for our admonition, to whom the end of the ages did come, 1 Cor 10:11 (YLT)
=> Here the ages end.
=> Can't find the verse stating God uncreates the universe.

So if the eons/ages/time is uncreated they automatically end.
Doesn't that mean aion, aionis by definition end?

The major mistake that most people are doing here is called an Anachronistic Fallacy. That is, applying our current understanding of physics (time), and believing that is how people 2000 years ago also views physics (time).

It was not until 1900's when Einstien made his famous discovery of special relativity, that time was proposed and theoretically agreed upon as the fourth dimension of space. So presently, we know that time and space are connected called the 'time-space' continuum. So with our present understanding of this theory of relativity, obviously if we leave this 'space' we also leave 'time' and hence time does not exist in the spirit. That, we can all agree on (believe it or not).

However, that is not how the Greeks understood time, nor how the prophets and apostles understood time, nor how was it applied or used 2000 years ago. According their understanding, time can never cease to be. It ended (as in the end of the day) but kept going, time was always and intrinsically immortal, an aspect of God Himself. In Him we live and move and have our being and God never dies and therefore time never ends.

I agree with the 2 parts of the quote. The special relativity part and the apostles not having understanding of this concept.
But that brings up more questions than it answers I'm afraid.

Did God inspire the words written by the apostles most to fit their time/knowledge/science or our time/knowledge/science?
In other words do we read the Bible with our knowledge or that of 2000+ years ago.
If the answer is 2000 years ago then my question is are we allowed to use Einsteins research when researching the Bible?

[Craig]

Thanks for being honest. Thanks for asking questions instead of assuming, when you did not understand.

The major mistake that most people are doing here is called an Anachronistic Fallacy. That is, applying our current understanding of physics (time), and believing that is how people 2000 years ago also views physics (time).

It was not until 1900's when Einstien made his famous discovery of special relativity, that time was proposed and theoretically agreed upon as the fourth dimension of space. So presently, we know that time and space are connected called the 'time-space' continuum. So with our present understanding of this theory of relativity, obviously if we leave this 'space' we also leave 'time' and hence time does not exist in the spirit. That, we can all agree on (believe it or not).

However, that is not how the Greeks understood time, nor how the prophets and apostles understood time, nor how was it applied or used 2000 years ago. According their understanding, time can never cease to be. It ended (as in the end of the day) but kept going, time was always and intrinsically immortal, an aspect of God Himself. In Him we live and move and have our being and God never dies and therefore time never ends.

I agree with the 2 parts of the quote. The special relativity part and the apostles not having understanding of this concept.
But that brings up more questions than it answers I'm afraid.

Questions are good.

The word aion was used to describe a lifetime. In 99.99999998% of the time, all life begins and all life ends...

Did God inspire the words written by the apostles most to fit their time/knowledge/science or our time/knowledge/science?
In other words do we read the Bible with our knowledge or that of 2000+ years ago.

If the answer is 2000 years ago then my question is are we allowed to use Einsteins research when researching the Bible?

It is difficult to understand. How I see it is this, just because Einstein changed our definition of how time is understood does not mean that what was said 2000 years was incorrect.

Psalm 90:2
Before the mountains were born and you gave birth to the earth and the world, even the ages and ages, You are God.

So they believe God was outside time because He created it. At the same time, God is that 0.00000002%. Is God living? So how long is His lifetime?

[WhiteWings]

Very clear answer Craig. I know 'all' about Einsteins theory so that makes it much easier to understand for me.

For your question how old God is. Depends if you are a young earth or old earth believer.
So my answers are:
a] God is 6000 years old.
b] God is 14.7 billion years old.

For the rest of his existance He lived outside time. (maybe even now)

"I'm the alpha and omega. The beginning and the end"
Isn't that about time too?
Without time you always live now. Never yesterday of tommorrow.

[Craig]

Very clear answer Craig. I know 'all' about Einsteins theory so that makes it much easier to understand for me.

For your question how old God is. Depends if you are a young earth or old earth believer.
So my answers are:
a] God is 6000 years old.
b] God is 14.7 billion years old.

For the rest of his existance He lived outside time. (maybe even now)

"I'm the alpha and omega. The beginning and the end"
Isn't that about time too?
Without time you always live now. Never yesterday of tommorrow.

Exactly. So one is a view from theoretical science, while the other is a view of observed science.