article on the greek of matt 25:46

[Truth seeker]

Hi Everyone,
In my efforts to understand the greek translations more I stumbled upon this article: http://www.daily-bible-study-tips.com/Reader-Questions-Answered/Greek-Matthew-25-46.htm :Chinscratch:

your thoughts as always would be appreciated as it does seem to make sense initially what hes saying however it is 5am in the morning so I may need to keep going over it.
It does have me wondering ast the minute and whilst I dont believe in ET I am still trying to convince myself on UR and until my knowledge grows I will be like a ship in the wind if you like!

[darryl]

Hi Everyone,
In my efforts to understand the greek translations more I stumbled upon this article: http://www.daily-bible-study-tips.com/Reader-Questions-Answered/Greek-Matthew-25-46.htm :Chinscratch:

your thoughts as always would be appreciated as it does seem to make sense initially what hes saying however it is 5am in the morning so I may need to keep going over it.
It does have me wondering ast the minute and whilst I dont believe in ET I am still trying to convince myself on UR and until my knowledge grows I will be like a ship in the wind if you like!

please do not forget the importance of the Septuagint in these discussions.

The Septuagint is critically/crucially  important in understanding how the people to whom the New Testament was written understood the teachings of the New Testament.  For it was the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament (Greek being the universal language at that time), in use by the Jews of Jesus time.

The Septuagint is quoted many times by the NT writers and even by Jesus Himself. Therefore, it is an authoritative translation.

A quick bit of Septuagint research yielded a verse in the Septuagint which uses exactly the same Greek word that's used in Matthew 25:46, aiōnion   αἰώνιον.Genesis 9:16  says , "And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting [Heb: olam aionion/eonian] covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth."

Is this covenant  truly eternal/ everlasting—endless?. No, it cannot be everlasting/ eternal/endless because this earth will pass away along with all it's living creatures..all the animals, insects, fish and humans.When this earth passes away there'll be no more need for this covenant. I know there are many more examples but its late, I'm tired so this will do for now to prove 'aionion' does not mean eternal in every instance in the Bible.

BTW, the writer you quote makes a mistake. He says' In the LXX (Septuagint) , 'aionios' is used only to translate the Hebrew word olam..'
I have proved this assertion wrong because in Gen 9:16,  'aiōnion' is used to translate 'olam', not 'aionios'.

I know there are several instances where the word 'aionion' (the same word used in Mt 25:46) is used in the Septuagint to translate 'olam' where it cannot mean 'eternal'. So, the writer of that article is mistaken.

I'll have a look at 'kolasis' at a later time.

[darryl]

I have found the concluding definition given in THE VOCABULARY OF THE GREEK TESTAMENT (edited by James Hope Moulton and George Milligan) most helpful. Concerning aiõnios we read, "In general, the word depicts that of which the horizon is not in view . . ." (p.16).

If the horizon of the extermination spoken of by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 1:9 is simply not in view, then we can see that what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:22 can truly occur. The same all who are dying in Adam, which includes some who incur eonian extermination, can indeed eventually be vivified in Christ.

The Bible, in fact, does not speak of judgment and condemnation, death and destruction, hades and Gehenna, or any of these serious consequences of sin, as unending. It may refer to them as not having the end in view, but none of these fearful works of God can keep Him from achieving His will (1 Tim.2:4); reconciling all through the blood of Christ's cross (Col.1:20), and becoming All in all (1 Cor.15:28). :dsunny:

[Truth seeker]

 :banana:
thank you Darryl I had a feeling you would reply to this :dsunny: I feel bad sometimes asking but I hope it time I can help others understand too. It can get frustrating when I fall on a possible issue like the link I gave so while I am looking for answers help from those such as yourself are invaluable! I dont want to return to the ET understanding I just cant see that as true and the more study I do and the more help I get the more I hope it will drift into the past!
whats your thoughts on the sentence
" Whatever we say about the punishment, we have to be willing to say exactly the same thing about the life. Furthermore, the New Testament uses aionios to describe God, the Holy Spirit, the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and the honor and power of Jesus Christ. Are those "for an age" or "eternal"?

if the punishment is not eternal and the sentence sounds like its implying the same ending for both if the punishment is an age how does this work for the life?

[Shev]

I think, with regards to aion and its forms, that there is another aspect that ET proponents do not take into account, namely that many early UR believers had Greek as their mother tongue, including more famous cases such as Origen and Clementine of Alexandria. We can safely assume they knew their mother tongue better than we can possibly hope to through research, and if aion and its various forms precluded UR, they would have had no case to make. Not only this, but Augustine, who was so influential in the spread of ET, acknowledged that his own Greek was poor, not being his natural language. Indeed, in many ways the transition from UR to ET in the early centuries ran parallel with the shift from Greek to Latin as the primary tongue of the church.

This all being the case, it is rather preposterous to claim that those early Greek speakers were mistaken in their understanding of aion and its forms.

[darryl]

Hi Everyone,
In my efforts to understand the greek translations more I stumbled upon this article: http://www.daily-bible-study-tips.com/Reader-Questions-Answered/Greek-Matthew-25-46.htm :Chinscratch:

your thoughts as always would be appreciated as it does seem to make sense initially what hes saying however it is 5am in the morning so I may need to keep going over it.
It does have me wondering ast the minute and whilst I dont believe in ET I am still trying to convince myself on UR and until my knowledge grows I will be like a ship in the wind if you like!

Hi, Truth seeker !.Regarding 'kolasis' I have found a passage in the Septuagint where 'kolasis' is used and it definitely means 'correction' not retributive vindictive punishment.

Ezekial 44 9-14
9 'Thus says the Lord GOD, "No foreigner uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, of all the foreigners who are among the sons of Israel, shall enter My sanctuary. 10"But the Levites who went far from Me when Israel went astray, who went astray from Me after their idols, shall bear the punishment for their iniquity. 11"Yet they shall be ministers in My sanctuary, having oversight at the gates of the house and ministering in the house; they shall slaughter the burnt offering and the sacrifice for the people, and they shall stand before them to minister to them'.

12"Because they ministered to them before their idols and became a stumbling block of iniquity to the house of Israel, therefore I have sworn against them," declares the Lord GOD, "that they shall bear the punishment ( kolasis ) for their iniquity.

13 'And they shall not come near to Me to serve as a priest to Me, nor come near to any of My holy things, to the things that are most holy; but they will bear their shame and their abominations which they have committed.14"Yet I will appoint them to keep charge of the house, of all its service and of all that shall be done in it'.

So, what is this 'punishment' for these backslidden priests ?. Not death, not torment or torture. No, Yahweh punishes the Levites for their participation in idolatry by not allowing them to act as priests in the new temple.

  Ezekiel 44:13 ►
13 'And they shall not come near to Me to serve as a priest to Me, nor come near to any of My holy things, to the things that are most holy; but they will bear their shame and their abominations which they have committed.

'Kolasis' definitely means 'correction' here (to teach these priests the error of their ways)  , not retributive vindictive punishment.

Please note these sinful priests were still allowed to keep 'charge of the house'.Verse 14"Yet I will appoint them to keep charge of the house, of all its service and of all that shall be done in it'.

Yahweh is merciful and there is purpose to His corrective chastisement. :dsunny:

[Truth seeker]

I think, with regards to aion and its forms, that there is another aspect that ET proponents do not take into account, namely that many early UR believers had Greek as their mother tongue, including more famous cases such as Origen and Clementine of Alexandria. We can safely assume they knew their mother tongue better than we can possibly hope to through research, and if aion and its various forms precluded UR, they would have had no case to make. Not only this, but Augustine, who was so influential in the spread of ET, acknowledged that his own Greek was poor, not being his natural language. Indeed, in many ways the transition from UR to ET in the early centuries ran parallel with the shift from Greek to Latin as the primary tongue of the church.

This all being the case, it is rather preposterous to claim that those early Greek speakers were mistaken in their understanding of aion and its forms.

thats very interesting, never knew any of that  :thumbsup:

[darryl]

:banana:
thank you Darryl I had a feeling you would reply to this :dsunny: I feel bad sometimes asking but I hope it time I can help others understand too. It can get frustrating when I fall on a possible issue like the link I gave so while I am looking for answers help from those such as yourself are invaluable! I dont want to return to the ET understanding I just cant see that as true and the more study I do and the more help I get the more I hope it will drift into the past!
whats your thoughts on the sentence
" Whatever we say about the punishment, we have to be willing to say exactly the same thing about the life. Furthermore, the New Testament uses aionios to describe God, the Holy Spirit, the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and the honor and power of Jesus Christ. Are those "for an age" or "eternal"?

if the punishment is not eternal and the sentence sounds like its implying the same ending for both if the punishment is an age how does this work for the life?

you know the hymn, 'Rock of ages '?. God is Eternal of course but He also is the God of the Ages. Throughout His plan of salvific salvation for humankind God deals in a series of 'Ages'. The Biblical 'Ages' make a fascinating study.

Also, Jesus said that 'aionion life' is the life of knowing God and Jesus.Jesus described it more in a 'qualitative sense' than a 'quantitative sense'.As Westerners we find it hard to grasp the Hebrew mindset concerning 'aionion life'. We Westerners trend to think in terms of linear 'time' and miss the subtleties inherent in the  terms 'olam' and 'aionion'.

[Lorenzo]

Hi Everyone,
In my efforts to understand the greek translations more I stumbled upon this article: http://www.daily-bible-study-tips.com/Reader-Questions-Answered/Greek-Matthew-25-46.htm :Chinscratch:

your thoughts as always would be appreciated as it does seem to make sense initially what hes saying however it is 5am in the morning so I may need to keep going over it.
It does have me wondering ast the minute and whilst I dont believe in ET I am still trying to convince myself on UR and until my knowledge grows I will be like a ship in the wind if you like!

Well, for what concernes kolasis, the author forgot to check the word "kolazo", the verb the word kolasis comes from, for its first meaning is "to prune" (Thayer's dictionary). The verses that are quoted all include the fact that the punishment inflicted was in order to "change" someone, not to "revenge".

For what concerns aionios, please allow me to read Aion, Aionios, Translated Everlasting, Eternal, Shown To Denote Limited Duration (by J. W. Hanson, you can find it in the Scholar's Corner). It is enough to fill every hole.

[darryl]

:banana:
thank you Darryl I had a feeling you would reply to this :dsunny: I feel bad sometimes asking but I hope it time I can help others understand too. It can get frustrating when I fall on a possible issue like the link I gave so while I am looking for answers help from those such as yourself are invaluable! I dont want to return to the ET understanding I just cant see that as true and the more study I do and the more help I get the more I hope it will drift into the past!
whats your thoughts on the sentence
" Whatever we say about the punishment, we have to be willing to say exactly the same thing about the life. Furthermore, the New Testament uses aionios to describe God, the Holy Spirit, the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and the honor and power of Jesus Christ. Are those "for an age" or "eternal"?

if the punishment is not eternal and the sentence sounds like its implying the same ending for both if the punishment is an age how does this work for the life?

Hi, Truth seeker.  I have found yet another instance in the Septuagint Old Testament of the use of 'aionion' (αἰώνιον ) , the Greek word mistranslated as 'eternal' in Mt 25:46. This instance proves beyond any doubt that 'aionion' in Mt 25:46 cannot mean 'eternal'.

In Genesis 17:8  it says, 'The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting (aionion, αἰώνιον )  possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God."

Obviously the physical land of Canaan, where Abraham was then dwelling,  was not to be an everlasting possession to Abraham's descendants.This entire earth will pass away one day including (obviously ) the land of Canaan. Therefore the word 'aionion' ('olam' in the Hebrew) in Genesis 17:8 cannot mean 'eternal' . It must have something to do with 'age' as it is indeed translated in Young's Literal Version. 'and I have given to thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojournings, the whole land of Canaan, for a possession age-during, and I have become their God.' (Young's Literal Version ).

This proves beyond any doubt that 'aionion' in Mt 25:46 cannot mean 'eternal'.There also are other instances in the Septuagint where 'aionion' does not mean 'eternal' which prove that 'aionion', the word used in Mt 25: 46, does not mean 'eternal'. 

[Seth]

Hi Everyone,
In my efforts to understand the greek translations more I stumbled upon this article: http://www.daily-bible-study-tips.com/Reader-Questions-Answered/Greek-Matthew-25-46.htm :Chinscratch:

your thoughts as always would be appreciated as it does seem to make sense initially what hes saying however it is 5am in the morning so I may need to keep going over it.
It does have me wondering ast the minute and whilst I dont believe in ET I am still trying to convince myself on UR and until my knowledge grows I will be like a ship in the wind if you like!

To his comments about aion. I don't believe the aionios zoe means immortality, and therefore neither do I believe that aionios judgment means Eternal judgement. The Bible does talk about immortality promised to believers, such as "this mortal must put on immortality," but I believe that aionios zoe refers to Christ within us, in the ages, age abiding life. He resides internally right now.

http://www.mercifultruth.com/eternity.html

[micah7:9]

All good stuff to study :dsunny:

[Thy Kingdom Come]

Hi, Truth seeker.  I have found yet another instance in the Septuagint Old Testament of the use of 'aionion' (αἰώνιον ) , the Greek word mistranslated as 'eternal' in Mt 25:46. This instance proves beyond any doubt that 'aionion' in Mt 25:46 cannot mean 'eternal'.

In Genesis 17:8  it says, 'The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting (aionion, αἰώνιον )  possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God."

Obviously the physical land of Canaan, where Abraham was then dwelling,  was not to be an everlasting possession to Abraham's descendants.This entire earth will pass away one day including (obviously ) the land of Canaan. Therefore the word 'aionion' ('olam' in the Hebrew) in Genesis 17:8 cannot mean 'eternal' . It must have something to do with 'age' as it is indeed translated in Young's Literal Version. 'and I have given to thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land of thy sojournings, the whole land of Canaan, for a possession age-during, and I have become their God.' (Young's Literal Version ).

This proves beyond any doubt that 'aionion' in Mt 25:46 cannot mean 'eternal'.There also are other instances in the Septuagint where 'aionion' does not mean 'eternal' which prove that 'aionion', the word used in Mt 25: 46, does not mean 'eternal'.

Hey Darryl,

I once went through the entire LXX and read every verse containing the adjective aionion.  This is one of my favorites...  The children of God will build or repair the "eternal" wastes...

Isaiah 61

The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;

To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified.

And they shall build the old [aionion] wastes, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations.

[darryl]

good find !..thanks !  :dsunny:

[Thy Kingdom Come]

good find !..thanks !  :dsunny:

There is another one that is even much more compelling, but it might be a translation error by those who translated the Hebrew into the LXX.  It literally says the "you will forget your everlasting contempt"  using the exact same greek words as are used in this passage:

Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt αἰσχύνην αἰώνιον.

The passage is here:

Isaiah 54:4 Fear not; for thou shalt not be ashamed: neither be thou confounded; for thou shalt not be put to shame: for thou shalt forget the shame of thy youth αἰσχύνην αἰώνιον, and shalt not remember the reproach of thy widowhood any more.

However, the Hebrew does not use olam in this passage.  It uses a similar-looking word (meaning "of thy youth") that the translators may have mistaken for olam.  At any rate, it's hard to believe that expert translators would make a translation saying "you will forget your everlasting contempt" if "everlasting" really meant "everlasting".  You would think they would notice that their translation is self-contradictory.

[Truth seeker]

thank you so much for all your help everyone! not been on for a good while but I'm still here lol. I have read a really good but lately that's helped similar to "hope beyond Hell" its called "raising hell". I have it on pdf if anyone wants it.

[ps]

Another article on the same topic that might be of interest :
http://moments.nbseminary.com/archives/114-punishment-kolasis-kolazein-%E2%80%93-eternal-or-otherwise-matthew-2546-acts-421-2-peter-29-1-john-418/

[marie glen]

Another article on the same topic that might be of interest :
http://moments.nbseminary.com/archives/114-punishment-kolasis-kolazein-%E2%80%93-eternal-or-otherwise-matthew-2546-acts-421-2-peter-29-1-john-418/

this does look very good! though I hadn't time to read it all.. (dang it!)

Hi Everyone,
In my efforts to understand the greek translations more I stumbled upon this article: http://www.daily-bible-study-tips.com/Reader-Questions-Answered/Greek-Matthew-25-46.htm :Chinscratch:

your thoughts as always would be appreciated as it does seem to make sense initially what hes saying however it is 5am in the morning so I may need to keep going over it.
It does have me wondering ast the minute and whilst I dont believe in ET I am still trying to convince myself on UR and until my knowledge grows I will be like a ship in the wind if you like!

Another thing.. to my way of thinking.. this is the separation of the wheat from tares.. and sheep from goats.. when Jesus returns, is what I believe it says.. (there's no mention of lake of fire at Jesus' return)

I believe the gathering of tares to be burned is poetic language (clever talk by our Father and Jesus) for the gathering to armageddon.. but the wheat is gathered into His barn (at His return)

the wolves are gathered to armageddon which, I believe will be that hatred the adversary has (rev 12:last verse) and the world has for Israel, wanting to prey on her, in the manner of wolves..

:2c: :Peace2: :gsmile:

[ps]

BTW, the writer you quote makes a mistake. He says' In the LXX (Septuagint) , 'aionios' is used only to translate the Hebrew word olam..'
I have proved this assertion wrong because in Gen 9:16,  'aiōnion' is used to translate 'olam', not 'aionios'.

This is not evidence of the 'spirit' of his statement being wrong.  As that author has mentioned kolasis and kolasin being the same word, so are aionios and aionion the same word.  Gary and Tony indicate that here:
http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/EternalPunishmentNotTrueToGreek.html
also tossing aioniou into the mix.

I know there are several instances where the word 'aionion' (the same word used in Mt 25:46) is used in the Septuagint to translate 'olam' where it cannot mean 'eternal'.

And that author states that olam can be used to indicate concepts other than eternal, in the same sentence you referred to regarding his reference to use of aionios for olam, "aionios is used only to translate the Hebrew word olam, which, depending on the context, means a variety of things in the general area of time, eternity, duration, and the existence of various dynasties, places, and things".

So, the writer of that article is mistaken.

He seems to be in general agreement with you about olam, and you perhaps not aware there's only a grammatical difference in aionios/anionion, not a semantic difference.

[ps]

Well, for what concernes kolasis, the author forgot to check the word "kolazo", the verb the word kolasis comes from, for its first meaning is "to prune" (Thayer's dictionary).

It doesn't appear that he forgot, as he does mention kolazo and pruning (section heading "Kolasin vs. Kolazo vs. Pruning"), although has found from other reference works the possible horticultural origin aspect isn't really applicable to most uses of the actual word[1] used (which is not kolazo) - the other article I referenced earlier also covers that, also with reference to specific works of greek, which I believe represent time periods both before and after new testament writers are likely to have written.

The verses that are quoted all include the fact that the punishment inflicted was in order to "change" someone, not to "revenge".

Were you referring to these verse references (Jeremiah 18:20 (note that that the cited phrase does not appear in most modern translations or [apparently] the Hebrew); Ezekiel 14:3; Ezekiel 14:4, 7; Ezekiel 18:30; Ezekiel 43:11; and Ezekiel 44:12.)?  (Those, along with Daniel 6:12,13 per Dr. Perkins cover all uses of the entire word family in generally accepted as inspired books of Septuagint.  He indicates there are multiple other uses in some of the other books.)

(If not those verses, then what? But...)

If so, I observe that in each of those passages, the "change" effected by the punishment doesn't seem to be in the best interest of any of those to whom the word(action/state) is applied(applies), but more likely to the benefit of others.  As if those to whom the "punishment" applies are the pruned part, the part that is removed (perhaps cast into a fire, or outer darkness?), not what remains after pruning - which would still fit with the notion of pruning - but not so much the idea of "correction".

(septuagint - brenton)
Jer 18:20 Jeremiah was to be the cut off one, the one separated from that current life, and from those his testimony was in effect afflicting.
Eze 14:3,4,7 the iniquities of those sinning have set up their 'punishment' (separating, cutting off) from God, such that he did not intend to answer them - with v8 being the result
Eze 18:30 - encourages "be converted and turn away from all your ungodliness, and it shall not become to you the punishment of iniquity", i.e. if you repent then you won't be separated, v31, death will be avoided
Eze  43:11 - (seems kind of out there, I think similar to 44:12, but Dr. Larry Perkins in that article thought otherwise)
Eze 44:12 the Levites were to be separated God's holy things and areas, kept out of the holy of holies.

There is one more verse that apparently involves the same word family, mentioned by Dr. Larry Perkins (***although I have not been able to observe/spot it myself, with tools I've accessed***),
Daniel 6:12,13 - As Daniel was being thrown into the lion's den - it seems pretty clearly to be punishment, with the 'change' not seen as correctively positive.  Any positive correction, from the point of view of those applying, could only have been achieved prior to that affliction/application of punishment.  They weren't going to bring him back from death.

I also observe that in a number of those verses, the punishment/separation/cutting-off was to effect a permanent result - Jeremiah's desired death was going to be a permanent separation from life, (already mentioned) Daniel's (expected) death would be a permanent separation from life, the priest's separation was to be permanent for the full duration of their lives.  While Eze 18:30 allowed for returning, it could only have been up to the point of the fully inflicted punishment, death - their death would seem to be the end of any further possibility to turn away from ungodliness (similar to Daniel's situation, but with godly/wicked sides reversed).

New Testament usage also seems to generally reflect that usage (cutting off, with potential permanance - I will address eternal/aionios/etc in another reply I anticipate) - the orig passage, Matt 25:46 (in its context), Acts 4:21 (where they wanted to separate/cut-off (likely kill) Peter and company), 2Peter 2:9 keeping unrighteous separated/cut-off until day of judgement, 1Jn 4:18 - fear of 'being separated, cut-off' (if one loves, this need not be feared).

[1]
As a pertinent aside into how words do not necessarily reflect the meanings of their roots, consider the following from http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-root-words.html:

Meaning Does Not Always Equal the Definition

Some root words make less sense. For example, take the word apology. The root word "logy" is the study of something, and apo is from or away from. So, if you interpret the meaning of apology based on root words alone, you would see that it means "away from the study of something?" Not a very good explanation. When we see apology we think sorry or sad about something. So, although many words have root words, knowing the meaning of the roots won't always provide you with a clear definition.

Although, that said, I have suggested above how pruning could still apply, but the pruning not being "corrective" nor beneficial to all entities involved and likely not for those who were to be 'pruned' in many of the biblical instances.

***A very recent observation:  Some resource indicates kolasis (G2851) is from kolaphos rather than from kolazo***.  That resource also indicates G2852, kolaphizo, is also from kolaphos.  kolaphos is indicated to mean "a blow from the fist", "a buffeting, a blow".  These can be seen in the HELPS - word studies on biblehub, and seem credited to R. Trench, so I guess must be from one of his publications, although I have not been able to verify that. 

Perhaps the kolaphos root possibility has been previously mentioned somewhere on site, as my research indicated Roger Tutt is aware of this, and I've seen that he has contributioned here, but I hadn't run across it yet in anything I've read here.

But, there's certainly a lot I haven't read.

[ps]

This proves beyond any doubt that 'aionion' in Mt 25:46 cannot mean 'eternal'.There also are other instances in the Septuagint where 'aionion' does not mean 'eternal' which prove that 'aionion', the word used in Mt 25: 46, does not mean 'eternal'.

I offer contrary new testament evidence that it likely can reasonably mean eternal, at least as regards the kingdom and the life being entered into, continuing forward from that entry forever.

In Luke 1:31-33, Jesus reign/kingdom is spoken of by the angel, and is stated as A)covering ages (apparently plural of aion), and B) that the ages will be without end.  (This general idea also seems to reflected in Isaiah 9:6,7, though there to only aspects of that reign.)

I submit that ages without end is effectively eternal from some point forward.

And it appears to be the same kingdom that is being spoken of in the parable surrounding Matt 25:46, as well as the other parables of heaven close by.

Someone has stated that the zoe(n) 'life' is inherently longer ('god-life')and thus the aionion/s word with life thus takes on a longer time frame than it does when coupled with punishment - consider the following... 

The zoe(n) idea is contradicted by passages in Luke (12:15 and 16:25), where the same 'life' word (zoe(n) G2222) is used without an adjective from the family, and clearly refers to temporal life, not any extended god-life.  So, when the adjective is present it is providing clarification that the extended life is meant - it gives meaning, not takes/receives meaning from the zoe(n) life.  There are other NT uses where a 'guess' does have to made from context in the absence of the aion-adjective.  But those two are clearly temporal, and sufficient to show that in new testament usage zoe(n) does not of itself indicate anything more than earthly life.

I agree with the first Matt 25:46 article author, assuming within the passage that the two adjective instances would carry any different weight is unlikely, in the absence so far of anything to  indicate otherwise.

Reference has also elsewhere been made to Isaiah 57:16, about God not being angry forever.  But, that entire chapter, as with this parable, speaks of two groups - the righteous and the unrighteous/wicked.  The statement about the lapse of anger appears directed at the righteous, those who as a result of what they already suffered, were sorrowful in heart, and turned back from their sins and iniquity.  I grant that this is not obvious from all but one translation of the masoretic I've looked at, that being YLT.  The septuagint is much clearer regarding those who are sorrowful.  But, that particular verse, v16, falls in the midst of verses speaking of the righteous, several verses prior to a 'But'/and contrasting the wicked, who will be tossed and not have rest. 

This idea of the wicked/righteous/rebellious/obedient, and their different treatment  is also seen in other OT passages, including at least Jer 18:6-10 of nations, Eze 18:29-32 and Eze 33 of individuals.  In the Ezekiel passages, the opportunity to repent is apparently only available prior to death.  As in Matt 25:32-46, there is nothing to indicate its available after final punishment/judgment(/death) inflicted.

I have some other observations as well, but perhaps this is sufficient for TruthSeeker's consideration, and to challenge CST as well :), in addition to responding to darryl's statement.

[marie glen]

..this may not pertain, but the answer I came up with which satisfies me - as to truth, and I'm not easily satisfied - is to me there is only one "eternal" the Father, but who also gave the Son, the firstborn and beginning of all creation, "to have life in himself".

And to me the kingdom of God is ultimate reality.. everything came out from God and is returning to God.. not as formless, but as the creation being exactly what his blueprint is that it will be.. That in essence he is still creating it all.. from angel to universe to man and woman and the planet, etc..

I am not at all sure that any humans at all will go to the Lake of Fire! Even for an age or ages.. How can I think that?

Well the two in revelation chapter 19 are not, imo, thrown "alive" into the lof, but "active" - The two, being (1)the beast, world beast/body being an institution of man active(alive, acting) at the time of Jesus' return , and (2)the false prophet, being the false teaching and its 'prophecy' (implied) which has turned christendom/western civilization on its ear. (I do not think this is how this verse is usually viewed. But am convinced of it. And as of those verses, no humans in the lof.)

"age and age" - whenever I think, see, or come across this phrase, my mind immediately jumps to "age" as the millennium, "and age" as judgment 'day'.

To me, one of the very biggest pieces to the Revelation and Bible puzzle, is an overall plan. Just what is going on? I figure it is learning.. "Learning good from evil" ...The whole purpose of all of this! The whole human race, and the angels, are having it proven to our eyes, heart and mind "good from evil" (what I also think of as life from death, because Yahweh, I believe is both Life, and Perfection-so imperfection "missing the mark"/sin is the opposite of God/Life)

Following these thoughts, I can't help but see Bible prophecy (with its central thing in latter days being the Book of Revelation) as being this life, and all of human history, as God's truth proving drama - Proving to all, that to turn or wander from God in any way can only ever lead to self destruction.. a wisp of self destructive smoke.. the smoke of (lesson of) which shall rise up forever and ever.. Obviously "Satan that old dragon and serpent" did not believe that! But it simply cannot be done.. if one wishes to "live" that is. To me good and evil, is the same as life and death - real death, not death as another form of life as humanity has been beguiled with. (imo)

Am I rambling?.. not really. You see, I cannot think of our heavenly Father as wasteful. Is He going to wake up all those never saved (yet) to simply toss them directly into fiery trial/Lake of Fire?

Not logical - logical being related to logos!

Think of it! What a glorious opportunity to hammer home all the Truth, to every heart and mind, by having a great day of the serious and grave review of all things! History, not a pretty picture. Should be plenty of weeping, even for the elect (to view all..) - I believe the not yet saved will repent and be reconciled during the 'day' of judgment.. and any stubborn hard cases will go to the lof - aiōnios

It's only at the end of that 'day' (age) - I believe, that is said, or carried out "those not believing - not written in the book "of Life" - will go to the lof - http://gospel-truth4all.blogspot.com/2016/01/his-great-plan-of-salvation.html - 2nd image explains

Jude 7 -- "Even as Sodom and Gomorrha... are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.  YLT of course, using the word "age-during"

Jude 7 "eternal / age-during"

LSJ Gloss:
αἰώνιος
lasting for an age ---- this, with the Dodson 2nd, is the one I'm going with.. I think most of the "forever" etc, is due to pagan/gnostic culture preconception of inherent immortality rather than "we shall put on immortality"

Dodson:
αἰώνιος
eternal, unending
age-long, and therefore: practically eternal, unending; partaking of the character of that which lasts for an age, as contrasted with that which is brief and fleeting.

Strong's:
αἰώνιος
perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well)
Derivation: from G165;

KJV Usage: eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

G165
Thayer:
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2) without beginning
3) without end, never to cease, everlasting

For Synonyms see entry G5801
Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words

Eternal
Everlasting

αἰώνιος
aiōnios
ahee-o'-nee-os
From G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well)
KJV Usage: eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

[darryl]

This proves beyond any doubt that 'aionion' in Mt 25:46 cannot mean 'eternal'.There also are other instances in the Septuagint where 'aionion' does not mean 'eternal' which prove that 'aionion', the word used in Mt 25: 46, does not mean 'eternal'.

I offer contrary new testament evidence that it likely can reasonably mean eternal, at least as regards the kingdom and the life being entered into, continuing forward from that entry forever.

In Luke 1:31-33, Jesus reign/kingdom is spoken of by the angel, and is stated as A)covering ages (apparently plural of aion), and B) that the ages will be without end.  (This general idea also seems to reflected in Isaiah 9:6,7, though there to only aspects of that reign.)

I submit that ages without end is effectively eternal from some point forward.

And it appears to be the same kingdom that is being spoken of in the parable surrounding Matt 25:46, as well as the other parables of heaven close by.

Someone has stated that the zoe(n) 'life' is inherently longer ('god-life')and thus the aionion/s word with life thus takes on a longer time frame than it does when coupled with punishment - consider the following... 

The zoe(n) idea is contradicted by passages in Luke (12:15 and 16:25), where the same 'life' word (zoe(n) G2222) is used without an adjective from the family, and clearly refers to temporal life, not any extended god-life.  So, when the adjective is present it is providing clarification that the extended life is meant - it gives meaning, not takes/receives meaning from the zoe(n) life.  There are other NT uses where a 'guess' does have to made from context in the absence of the aion-adjective.  But those two are clearly temporal, and sufficient to show that in new testament usage zoe(n) does not of itself indicate anything more than earthly life.

I agree with the first Matt 25:46 article author, assuming within the passage that the two adjective instances would carry any different weight is unlikely, in the absence so far of anything to  indicate otherwise.

Reference has also elsewhere been made to Isaiah 57:16, about God not being angry forever.  But, that entire chapter, as with this parable, speaks of two groups - the righteous and the unrighteous/wicked.  The statement about the lapse of anger appears directed at the righteous, those who as a result of what they already suffered, were sorrowful in heart, and turned back from their sins and iniquity.  I grant that this is not obvious from all but one translation of the masoretic I've looked at, that being YLT.  The septuagint is much clearer regarding those who are sorrowful.  But, that particular verse, v16, falls in the midst of verses speaking of the righteous, several verses prior to a 'But'/and contrasting the wicked, who will be tossed and not have rest. 

This idea of the wicked/righteous/rebellious/obedient, and their different treatment  is also seen in other OT passages, including at least Jer 18:6-10 of nations, Eze 18:29-32 and Eze 33 of individuals.  In the Ezekiel passages, the opportunity to repent is apparently only available prior to death.  As in Matt 25:32-46, there is nothing to indicate its available after final punishment/judgment(/death) inflicted.

I have some other observations as well, but perhaps this is sufficient for TruthSeeker's consideration, and to challenge CST as well :), in addition to responding to darryl's statement.

will you agree that in the LXX, 'aionion' sometimes means 'not eternal' ?....or are you saying 'aionion' ALWAYS means 'eternal' throughout the entire Greek Bible. I believe I gave an instance or two where 'aionion' definitely does not mean 'eternal' or 'never ending ' in the LXX. If this is true how do you know 'aionion' means 'eternal' in Mt 25:46 ?. You cannot know that for sure...therefore my point stands.

[eaglesway]

I often post about this issue. I am in agreement with ps, but also with you darryl.

It can mean eternal, but it often does not mean eternal.

For instance (in brief)

"that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace"

en tois aiosin (Eph 2:7) here aion is not referring to eternity, but age/worlds to come

"by faith we know that the age/worlds were framed by the word of God" katertisthai tous aionon rhemati {Heb 11:3)

In these place aion/aiona/aionian clearly refer to specific times/periods/worlds

In Hebrew thought, periods of time were as worlds also, that is why in Hebrews 1:2

2But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, and through whom He made the universe. epoiesin tous aionas

This is the letter to the Hebrews and the issue I am working around to is that the word aion comes from "olam", which could mean "world, age, ancient time, distant future, eternity, forever"

olam could mean all these things becasue it is a type of adjective that simply means "indeterminate, unkown or unkowable" and it finds its full meaning in association with the subject it defines.

So in Gen 6:4 it means the far distant past

In Gen 49:26 it means the far distant future

In Exodus 21:6 it means a slaves lifetime

To this day among Hebrews olam means both world and forever depending on the context and the subject olam describes......

(from a Jewish site- Hebrew Language Detective)
In the prayers of Rosh HaShana, we say hayom harat olam היום הרת עולם. Artscroll translates this phrase as "today is the birth(day) of the world", and offers the following comment:

The phrase is in the present tense, for on Rosh Hashanah of each year the Creation is renewed in its entirety...Although the root הרה usually refers to conception, it it sometimes is used to mean birth. This is its meaning here. Alternatively, according to Rabbeinu Tam, Creation took place on two levels: in Tishrei God decided that He would create the world, and in Nissan He did so. Thus Rosh Hashanah is literally the day on which the world was conceived in God's plan.(http://www.balashon.com/2010/09/olam.html)

In Psalms God is called El Olam, and we are told it means God who endures forever.... but it really means very much more, hearkening to Jesus' words "no man has seen God at any time" or Paul in 1 Tim 5:16

" who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion(kratos aionion). Amen."

....and here we see in 1 Tim 6 aionion means forever, because God's dominion is eternal.

Aion/aionion is not as flexible a word as olam- which by the way occurs over 450 times in the OT. Olam was frequently doubled by the hebrews ("olam olam") when it meant eternal.

In the case of "El Olam"....olam means more than "God of the ages", it means the inscrutable, unknowable, invisible God who alone has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light" He is immortal. He dwells forever. he is the God of the ages because by faith we know the age/worlds were formed by the word of His mouth, so that the invisible things are greater than the visible things, the olam things are hidden, difficult to see because of tremendous depth or breadth or distance in time or scope of thought or extremity of wisdom...." etc, etc I guess you get the idea of what I am saying, but a lot fo folks disagree with me on this, and I hate to say it but I think it is because this "aion is a period of time with a beginning and an end because Aristotle and Plato say so" has become an artifact of UR RELIGION.....

Please, nobody shoot me please...... LOLOL

[ps]

will you agree that in the LXX, 'aionion' sometimes means 'not eternal' ?

Yes.

....or are you saying 'aionion' ALWAYS means 'eternal' throughout the entire Greek Bible.

No.

I believe I gave an instance or two where 'aionion' definitely does not mean 'eternal' or 'never ending ' in the LXX.

Yes.

If this is true how do you know 'aionion' means 'eternal' in Mt 25:46 ?.

Because of the contextually relevant kingdom, since in Luke 1:33 the kingdom is spoken of as being ages without end (i.e. unending), and that kingdom is the context of the separation into life (inherit kingdom) and punishment (depart into fire).

You cannot know that for sure...

I think Luke 1:33 and the entire parable context of Mt 25:46 is an extremely strong indication otherwise.

therefore my point stands.

Assuming you mean this point

This instance proves beyond any doubt that 'aionion' in Mt 25:46 cannot mean 'eternal'.

In Genesis 17:8  ...

then no. 

I observe, there is significant biblical doubt that your point stands as regards the coincident (right) 'kingdom' (life - zoe(n)), and the (left) 'kingdom' punishment (kolasi-) in the parable of Mt 25:(31-)46.

General observation:  One indication of usage does not necessarily cover all indications of usage.  Even multiple indications of a specific usage do not mean a word does not have different meaning elsewhere.    darryl, you seem to acknowledge this...?

Observation specific to Mt 25:(31-)46, Luke 1:33 is extremely strong evidence, that given the 'life' and 'punishment' being coincident with that kingdom, aionio- does practically mean from the start (of the kingdom), continuous, permanent while moving forward, unending, as the kingdom with which they are both associated is indicated as being just that, ages without end (unending from starting point, continuous, permanent, indefinite, moving continuously onward.)  You could even drop the aionio- from both life and punishment, and still derive that meaning if you realize that the coincident kingdom was of ages without end (unending) - but, given that is not explicit in this particular parable, the aionio- clarifies that at the point used.  (Used also regarding the 'fire' prepared for the devil and his angels, that fire also seeming to be the specific form of 'punishment' spoken of coincident with 'life'.  v46 simply seems to be a repetition/summary of entering kingdom vs fire, life being kingdom and punishment being fire.)

Revisiting...
Even without the aionio-, a number of kolasi- instances in septuagint/LXX have a permanence associated with them, in regards to the context within which that kolasi- is assigned/performed.  (In Mt 25:(31-)46 the context is the 'kingdom'.) Several of the instances involve a physical death (permanent end to) that preceding temporal life (the death itself being unending with respect to that life).  The usage regarding the priests (Eze 44:-12+ LXX) involved a permanent (continuous within its temporal 'life' context, or unending within that context) separation from God, no longer to enter the holy-of-holies, where God resided.  Perhaps very similar to the separation indicated in the 'kingdom' context of Mt 25:(31-)46, and likely spoken of in 2Th 1:9 'away from the presence of the Lord' (there also being spoken of the 'penalty'/'punished'(ment) (dike G1349, a justice/judgement/sentence assigned) they will be 'paying' in that 'away from' situation.)

Of course, much of this train of thought would be useless, if the kingdom/reign of Luke 1:33 is not the kingdom spoken of in Mt 25:(31-)46 and surrounding.  Something that would require strong evidence to successfully indicate otherwise to me...  (Anticipates rustling of pages, review of many bits...)  The observations concerning the permanence/unending of kolasi- within the context/extent of the parable's kingdom, whatever that extent might be, would not be affected.