NT evidence aion/aionios/aionion/etc used as unending/ongoing/etc.

[marie glen]

It took me a while.. a bit of studying, etc, but I finally realized that it's like the Old Testament "Olam" ..the Hebrew. Which is basically, over the horizon.. past what you see.. :dunno: That's how I've come to think of it.

Jesus would have spoken in Aramaic - I'm a little fuzzy, I thought Aramaic might be a dialect of Hebrew.. but I think actually Hebrew is a dialect of the Aramaic.. Or something like that?

But Jesus likely spoke in the Aramaic, not the Greek (aion). So He said "olam". Over the horizon.. But then his words were translated into Greek.

And also Aion is the noun. And it means "an age". The confusion is aionios, the adjective. Now an adjective is weaker than a noun. And how can the adjective form of "an age", be forever??

I suppose that may be a bit simplified, but I think that's the basics of it. :Peace2:

[Andrew]

Consider 2 Cor 4:18
...for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are aionios (eternal)

But what is the response to PM's point that if aionios doesn't mean eternal (ongoing, continual)  then what is Paul's point. The things that are seen are temporal but so are the unseen? I just want somebody to refute this so I can sleep at night. Thank you

Andrew   

[GodIsLove]

Two literal translations:

The Concordant Literal:
18 at our not noting what is being observed, but what is not being observed, for what is being observed is temporary, yet what is not being observed is eonian.

Young's Literal:
18 we not looking to the things seen, but to the things not seen; for the things seen [are] temporary, but the things not seen [are] age-during.

Not sure if this helps. Maybe it means what we see around us is falling away, and we can't observe the coming age beyond the horizon (olam).

I wouldn't say that all unseen things are necessarily eternal...just that they are beyond our view right now as we live in this temporary age.

[trettep]

Consider 2 Cor 4:18
...for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are aionios (eternal)

But what is the response to PM's point that if aionios doesn't mean eternal (ongoing, continual)  then what is Paul's point. The things that are seen are temporal but so are the unseen? I just want somebody to refute this so I can sleep at night. Thank you

Andrew   

Aionios speaks to a continuing point in relation to the root of the adjective.  So what is aionios is something that speaks to CONTINUING beyond the age boundary.  It doesn't speak to the length of the duration.

So in the case of 2 Cor 4:18, you have that which is temporary (signifying something that certainly has an endpoint or finite duration whereas Aionios can refer to something that is of limited or infinite duration.

So in the context here we see that Paul is clearly indicating that what is seen as temporary is not going to exist beyond the age boundary.  So he is drawing the end point of the duration for which "temporary" is being applied to by contrasting it with aionios.  Therefore, that which is temporary in this context is temporary to the point and which the next age begins.

[trettep]

Two literal translations:

The Concordant Literal:
18 at our not noting what is being observed, but what is not being observed, for what is being observed is temporary, yet what is not being observed is eonian.

Young's Literal:
18 we not looking to the things seen, but to the things not seen; for the things seen [are] temporary, but the things not seen [are] age-during.

Not sure if this helps. Maybe it means what we see around us is falling away, and we can't observe the coming age beyond the horizon (olam).

I wouldn't say that all unseen things are necessarily eternal...just that they are beyond our view right now as we live in this temporary age.

I think the better way to translate aionios is to replace it with "age-enduring".

[darryl]

what I know is 'aionios' is a transliteration of 'olam' in the LXX...'olam' does not intrinsically mean'eternal' in the LXX....the NT writers including Paul extensively quoted from the LXX and were aware of this...therfore 'aionios' in the NT doesnt intrinsically mean 'eternal'...

u really must study all instances of 0lam= aionios both in the LXX and the NT to grasp the subtle meaning...our Western minds are used to thinking of things in linear concrete terms...

1 of the meanings of 'aionios' (in my understanding) means something that lasts as long as it lasts till it changes into something else..things of this world have a definite 'start' and a definite end...things of the next world are 'indefinite in their 'end'...its difficult for our Western minds to grasp ie the nuances of Hebrew thought...and Paul was a Hebrew.

besides, if Paul really meant 'eternal' in this verse he would have used a Greek word that conclusively means 'eternal' such as 'aidios'...Paul was after all fluent in Greek and was well aware of Greek words that conclusively mean 'eternal'.Why would God inspire Paul to use an ambiguos word like 'aionios' whenGod could have removed any doubt of what He meant simply by using a conclusively 'eternal' word?...God is not the author of confusion, after all.

[darryl]

Hourly:

1.of, pertaining to, occurring, or done each successive hour
2.computed or totaled in terms of an hour; using an hour as a basic unit of reckoning

Daily:

1.of, done, occurring, or issued each day or each weekday
2.computed or measured by the day

Eonian(alt. sp. of aeonian):

Of, relating to, or constituting an eon.

Aionian:

From Greek aiṓnios "lasting an age, perpetual" (derivative of aiṓn eon)

Force of the adjective can't be greater than it's noun derivative. The OP failed in his explanation.

you really need to study' aionios' in its relation  to the Hebrew concept 'olam'....the writers of the NT were Hebrew (apart possibly from Luke ) and thought like Hebrews even though they wrote in Greek...one cant gain an understanding of 'aionios' on its own, apart from its background of 'olam'.

[GodIsLove]

what I know is 'aionios' is a transliteration of 'olam' in the LXX...'olam' does not intrinsically mean'eternal' in the LXX....the NT writers including Paul extensively quoted from the LXX and were aware of this...therfore 'aionios' in the NT doesnt intrinsically mean 'eternal'...

u really must study all instances of 0lam= aionios both in the LXX and the NT to grasp the subtle meaning...our Western minds are used to thinking of things in linear concrete terms...

1 of the meanings of 'aionios' (in my understanding) means something that lasts as long as it lasts till it changes into something else..things of this world have a definite 'start' and a definite end...things of the next world are 'indefinite in their 'end'...its difficult for our Western minds to grasp ie the nuances of Hebrew thought...and Paul was a Hebrew.

besides, if Paul really meant 'eternal' in this verse he would have used a Greek word that conclusively means 'eternal' such as 'aidios'...Paul was after all fluent in Greek and was well aware of Greek words that conclusively mean 'eternal'.Why would God inspire Paul to use an ambiguos word like 'aionios' whenGod could have removed any doubt of what He meant simply by using a conclusively 'eternal' word?...God is not the author of confusion, after all.

I've read that there were actually no Hebrew or Greek words  for eternal...and that aidios means imperceptible:

The  Greek word translated "eternal" in Rom. 1:20 and  "everlasting" in Jude 6,  is aidios, and is very similar to the word "hades" translated "hell" in many English Bibles.  Hades is a compount of ha and des.  Ha means not or no--it is a negative.  And des means to see or perceive.
When put together it means "unseen" or "imperceptible."  Same is true of the word aidios.  It is a compount of "a or ha" and "idios."  Once again, "a or ha" is a negative meaning no or not, and idios likewise means to see or perceive.  When put together the word means to  not be able to see or imperceptible. 

:dontknow:

[darryl]

what I know is 'aionios' is a transliteration of 'olam' in the LXX...'olam' does not intrinsically mean'eternal' in the LXX....the NT writers including Paul extensively quoted from the LXX and were aware of this...therfore 'aionios' in the NT doesnt intrinsically mean 'eternal'...

u really must study all instances of 0lam= aionios both in the LXX and the NT to grasp the subtle meaning...our Western minds are used to thinking of things in linear concrete terms...

1 of the meanings of 'aionios' (in my understanding) means something that lasts as long as it lasts till it changes into something else..things of this world have a definite 'start' and a definite end...things of the next world are 'indefinite in their 'end'...its difficult for our Western minds to grasp ie the nuances of Hebrew thought...and Paul was a Hebrew.

besides, if Paul really meant 'eternal' in this verse he would have used a Greek word that conclusively means 'eternal' such as 'aidios'...Paul was after all fluent in Greek and was well aware of Greek words that conclusively mean 'eternal'.Why would God inspire Paul to use an ambiguos word like 'aionios' whenGod could have removed any doubt of what He meant simply by using a conclusively 'eternal' word?...God is not the author of confusion, after all.

I've read that there were actually no Hebrew or Greek words  for eternal...and that aidios means imperceptible:

The  Greek word translated "eternal" in Rom. 1:20 and  "everlasting" in Jude 6,  is aidios, and is very similar to the word "hades" translated "hell" in many English Bibles.  Hades is a compount of ha and des.  Ha means not or no--it is a negative.  And des means to see or perceive.
When put together it means "unseen" or "imperceptible."  Same is true of the word aidios.  It is a compount of "a or ha" and "idios."  Once again, "a or ha" is a negative meaning no or not, and idios likewise means to see or perceive.  When put together the word means to  not be able to see or imperceptible. 

:dontknow:

well, there's so many confusing opinions on this...the salient fact to me is why didnt the Holy Spirit inspire a less confusing/ ambiguos word than 'aionios' if/ when He wanted to convey something important like the (so called) eternity of hell ?...the obvious answer to me is that 'hell' is not 'eternal'...otherwise God is the author of confusion and the Bible says He is not the author of confusion.

[darryl]

with thanks to Eaglesway  for this gr8 post I copy n paste it here again (I hope he doesnt mind) cos it answers several important questions IMO
"aionios"(agelong) is the usual word in the Greek. "adios is used twice- Jude 1:6 and Rom. 1:20. Aionion is a translation of the Hebrew word "olam". To understand everlasting, forever, etc. properly, it is necessary to look at the Hebrew word "olam" and its hundreds of uses in the Old Testament...easy enough to do with E-sword or Biblos.

Whereas aionion is of limited duration, olam's duration is defined by the subject it is applied to, for instance when used as the "olam" God, it describes aan eternal or everalsting period, defined by the infinite life of God. When applied to a slave's indenture, "He shall bed your slave olam", it defines the period of the slaves remaining life, or until the debt for which he was enslaved is satisfied, or until the debt holder sets him free.

IMO seeing aionion, eternal, forever, etc. through the prism of "olam" gives a clearer understanding of why the English words used to translate are insufficient to transmit the full range of possible periods of time define by "olam".

Olam is an unknown or indeterminate time defined by the purpose or object it is connected to.

[darryl]

interesting article
Clarification of the Scriptures by the proper translation of the word "eon."

Here are some examples of the Biblical contradictions produced by the mistranslation of the word "eon."

1. The word "everlasting" is applied to things in some Bible passages that the Bible states, in other passages, is clearly NOT "everlasting".

"the everlasting hills" Gen 49:26 and Deut 33:15 (R.V.)

Yet the Bible states that the hills are NOT "everlasting."

Isa 54:10 "For the mountains shall depart and the hills be removed"

Amos 9:13 "and all the hills shall melt"

2 Peter 3:10 "and the earth shall be burned up"


2. Contradictory expressions as "the end of the world" and "world without end."

Matt 24:3 "the end of the world" (KJV) The accurate translation is: "conclusion of the eon."

Eph 3:21 "world without end" (KJV) The accurate translation is: "unto all the generations of the eon of the eons."

The inaccuracy and inconsistency of the translation of the words "olam" in the Old Testament and of "aion" and "aionios" in the New Testament has led to a tragic perversion of what the Scriptures actually teach in regard to the destiny of God's creatures.

Let's remember that we are told that God "is the Saviour of ALL men" (1 Tim 4:10); that He will justify ALL (Rom 5:18); that He will reconcile ALL unto Himself (Col 1:20);that He will give life to ALL (1 Cor. 15:22); and that finally when all enemies have been subjected, and death is abolished, that God will be "ALL IN ALL" (1 Cor 15:28).

If these statements are true, then it cannot be true that millions of His children are to be held in never-ending torment or that they will be permanently annihilated (by whatever method you may believe), nor that even one should receive such treatment. "Behold the Lamb of God, that TAKES AWAY the sin of the WORLD." He doesn't "offer" to take it away --- He TAKES it away. And the "sin" is not taken away from just "some people" in the world -- No, it is taken away from the WHOLE world!

This does not deny that "the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men" (Rom 1:18). There is no doubt whatever as to the fact that the Bible clearly teaches wrath -- not only in this age (eon) but in the age (eon) which is to come. "God will NOT be mocked." Whatever we sow, we will reap. But God's wrath is defined in Romans 1:18, 24, 26, 28. God's "wrath" is just giving us up to our own evil desires and allowing us to reap what we have sown.

Let us ALL remember that God says, "I'm NOT like you." "My ways are higher than your ways and my thoughts higher than your thoughts."

The word "Judgment" means to "set right" or to "turn around" or "turn back." God chastens us to turn us around, so we'll head in the right direction. That's the way we discipline our own children. Psalm 94:15 says, "But judgement shall RETURN unto righteousness."

Psalm 90:3, speaking of God, says, "Thou turnest man to destruction: and sayest, Return, ye children of men."

If destruction means annihilation, then how could anyone return to God after they have been permanently annihilated?

In 1 Cor 5:5, Paul tells us to "To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."

Notice that "destruction" is NOT annihilation, but the prelude to SALVATION! (Please see the study on "The Destruction of the Wicked.")

[trettep]

with thanks to Eaglesway  for this gr8 post I copy n paste it here again (I hope he doesnt mind) cos it answers several important questions IMO
"aionios"(agelong) is the usual word in the Greek. "adios is used twice- Jude 1:6 and Rom. 1:20. Aionion is a translation of the Hebrew word "olam". To understand everlasting, forever, etc. properly, it is necessary to look at the Hebrew word "olam" and its hundreds of uses in the Old Testament...easy enough to do with E-sword or Biblos.

Whereas aionion is of limited duration, olam's duration is defined by the subject it is applied to, for instance when used as the "olam" God, it describes aan eternal or everalsting period, defined by the infinite life of God. When applied to a slave's indenture, "He shall bed your slave olam", it defines the period of the slaves remaining life, or until the debt for which he was enslaved is satisfied, or until the debt holder sets him free.

IMO seeing aionion, eternal, forever, etc. through the prism of "olam" gives a clearer understanding of why the English words used to translate are insufficient to transmit the full range of possible periods of time define by "olam".

Olam is an unknown or indeterminate time defined by the purpose or object it is connected to.

Olam is the same as aion.  It is just that when it is used as an adjective then it is as aionios.


Aionios NEVER means Limited Duration.  This is what Universalists get wrong.  Let's consider the following verse:


Mat_25:46  And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Both bolded words above come from 'aionios'.   The meaning is the same in both places where it is used.  In fact, it means the same everywhere it is used.  Now for Olam it means the same as aionios everywhere Olam is used as an adjective.

So what does it mean?  Remember it NEVER means LIMITED DURATION, but it doesn't exclude it either.  Simply put - it doesn't refer to the length of the DURATION at all.  However, it does speak to when the DURATION CONTINUES.  If something is AIONIOS, it means:

IT IS and will CONTINUE to be THROUGH and BEYOND the AGE boundary such that it exists within the ADJACENT age.

So if we look again at Mat 25:46 - the AIONIOS PUNISHMENT must ALREADY be happening - Which it is - since everyone of us are being punished for Adam's sin and would CONTINUE to be punished for that sin into the ADJACENT AGE (Next age in this case when Christ returns with His reign).  Also, the AIONIOS LIFE is and will continue to be into that same age.

Rom_16:25  Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

The bolded part above is translated from AIONIOS.  Authors had a hard time with that one.  The meaning is the same.  Except in this case the adjacent age is in the past instead of the future. So again it is something that IS and in this case CONTINUED to be in the previous age.

Notice at no time did it say HOW long that it would exist but simply that it CONTINUED to be in the adjacent age.

As Universalists,  we need to remove ourselves from talk of limited duration since I can easily refute that understanding as I already did  in the previous verse and the one in Matthew 25:46.

[darryl]

with thanks to Eaglesway  for this gr8 post I copy n paste it here again (I hope he doesnt mind) cos it answers several important questions IMO
"aionios"(agelong) is the usual word in the Greek. "adios is used twice- Jude 1:6 and Rom. 1:20. Aionion is a translation of the Hebrew word "olam". To understand everlasting, forever, etc. properly, it is necessary to look at the Hebrew word "olam" and its hundreds of uses in the Old Testament...easy enough to do with E-sword or Biblos.

Whereas aionion is of limited duration, olam's duration is defined by the subject it is applied to, for instance when used as the "olam" God, it describes aan eternal or everalsting period, defined by the infinite life of God. When applied to a slave's indenture, "He shall bed your slave olam", it defines the period of the slaves remaining life, or until the debt for which he was enslaved is satisfied, or until the debt holder sets him free.

IMO seeing aionion, eternal, forever, etc. through the prism of "olam" gives a clearer understanding of why the English words used to translate are insufficient to transmit the full range of possible periods of time define by "olam".

Olam is an unknown or indeterminate time defined by the purpose or object it is connected to.

Olam is the same as aion.  It is just that when it is used as an adjective then it is as aionios.


Aionios NEVER means Limited Duration.  This is what Universalists get wrong.  Let's consider the following verse:


Mat_25:46  And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Both bolded words above come from 'aionios'.   The meaning is the same in both places where it is used.  In fact, it means the same everywhere it is used.  Now for Olam it means the same as aionios everywhere Olam is used as an adjective.

So what does it mean?  Remember it NEVER means LIMITED DURATION, but it doesn't exclude it either.  Simply put - it doesn't refer to the length of the DURATION at all.  However, it does speak to when the DURATION CONTINUES.  If something is AIONIOS, it means:

IT IS and will CONTINUE to be THROUGH and BEYOND the AGE boundary such that it exists within the ADJACENT age.

So if we look again at Mat 25:46 - the AIONIOS PUNISHMENT must ALREADY be happening - Which it is - since everyone of us are being punished for Adam's sin and would CONTINUE to be punished for that sin into the ADJACENT AGE (Next age in this case when Christ returns with His reign).  Also, the AIONIOS LIFE is and will continue to be into that same age.

Rom_16:25  Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

The bolded part above is translated from AIONIOS.  Authors had a hard time with that one.  The meaning is the same.  Except in this case the adjacent age is in the past instead of the future. So again it is something that IS and in this case CONTINUED to be in the previous age.

Notice at no time did it say HOW long that it would exist but simply that it CONTINUED to be in the adjacent age.

As Universalists,  we need to remove ourselves from talk of limited duration since I can easily refute that understanding as I already did  in the previous verse and the one in Matthew 25:46.

yes, well...like i said..its very difficult for our Western linear/ 'concrete' type minds to comprehend the sublties/ nuances in this word 'olam' and aion/ aionios etc

[Andrew]

Thanks for those replies guys. Those were some great posts and dialogue. I think I'll sleep better tonight.

[jabcat]

yes, well...like i said..its very difficult for our Western linear/ 'concrete' type minds to comprehend the sublties/ nuances in this word 'olam' and aion/ aionios etc

Yep.  multiple views, interpretations, understandings, opinions.  To me, the main thing is, it doesn't appear as clear cut and dried, black and white, "eternal or nothing" as ET advocates (and most translations) make it out to be.  Again to me; variations of unknown, unspecified, age, etc. are more hopeful and sensible interpretations for some of those words (other than adios).

[darryl]

yes, well...like i said..its very difficult for our Western linear/ 'concrete' type minds to comprehend the sublties/ nuances in this word 'olam' and aion/ aionios etc

Yep.  multiple views, interpretations, understandings, opinions.  To me, the main thing is, it doesn't appear as clear cut and dried, black and white, "eternal or nothing" as ET advocates (and most translations) make it out to be.  Again to me; variations of unknown, unspecified, age, etc. are more hopeful and sensible interpretations for some of those words (other than adios).

:iagree: :thumbsup: