Anti-universalist article about aion

[Zach]

http://ovrlnd.com/Universalism/aionios.html

I'm just wondering if anyone has any critique on this article. I can see a few problems with it, but I haven't done enough study on aion and aionios to absolutely confirm or refute what they say.

[Craig]

Very easy rebuttle, but people don't want to accept it.

Adding Aionios to a noun, makes it mean it will last as long as it lasts. It is a descriptive word to describe the ambigouity of the duration. In short, an indefinite duration, which can be limited or unlimited, confined to an end or perpetual without end.

You are not going to win the battle by demonstrating aionios means age-abiding, because there are references to aionios durations in Scripture which are and inheritantly perpetual which will destroy that premise. You aren't going to win the battle by demonstrating aionios means perpetual because there are references to aionios durations in Scripture which are age-abiding and have a definite end.

The problem is the fallacy of hasty generalizations. That is the 'Black or White' or 'All or Nothing' approach to communication and thought.

The same arguement is used concerning the word "All". All doesn't mean all, though I am sure you have heard UR teachers say, "All means all!" and stamp their foot down in stubborn stances. The truth is all pertains to the catagory, group, audience, situation, circumstance that it is taking about.

So if I had a group of children in a room for Sunday School and I said, "All those who know the answer to my question will get a candy." I am not talking about the adult congregation in the main sanctuary, but the group of children in Sunday School. So my "All" did not apply to all, and it also did not apply to all the kids who didn't know the answer either, nor did it apply to next weeks Sunday School class. All the children in the Sunday School Room, who knew the answer to my question, that day, when I asked it, recieves a candy.

Then of course, there are times when all does mean all!

[Zach]

Thanks, and I agree that many universalists go too far with aionios.

What did you think of the part relating to the age to come?

[Craig]

Well the age to come argument, was what he hinged his argument on. He doesn't have much because he makes a judgment in the beginning:

They exhaust all their resources to refute this because, quite literally, if the word does indeed mean eternal in regards to the after life, the age to come, the case for Christian universalism evaporates before their very eyes. However, it is wise to note that anything that is extra biblical is just that"extra biblical. As such we are not to base our doctrines upon the musings and words of uninspired men.

Essentially saying, if you don't agree with me, you are uninspired, so let us just end it there. Blah.  :thumbdown:

[Reverend G]

I'd take him up on the meaning of inspiered, since as we are all God's creation, are we not all "inspired"?

[FineLinen]

http://ovrlnd.com/Universalism/aionios.html

I'm just wondering if anyone has any critique on this article. I can see a few problems with it, but I haven't done enough study on aion and aionios to absolutely confirm or refute what they say.

Let's meet the author of the article shall we?

http://www.ovrlnd.com/MainPage/TheWebmaster/abouttheauthor.html

Eric graduated from Divinity School a few years ago at 27 years of age. He once posted that he "had tweaked his doctrine to perfection" except for two points. What the two points were was never disclosed, but I have the distinct impression that perfection is not quite as close as he imagines!  :laughing7:

[FineLinen]

What The New Testament Teaches

Aeonian Life Passes Into A Region Above Time

Let us consider the true meaning of the words "aion" and "aionios".

These are the originals of the terms rendered by our translators "everlasting," for ever and ever" and on this translation, so misleading, a vast portion of the popular dogma of endless torment is built up. I say, without hesitation, misleading and incorrect; for "aion" means "an age," a limited period, whether long or short, though often of indefinite length; and the adjective "aionios" means "of the age," "age-long," "aeonian," and NEVER "everlasting" (of its own proper force), it is true that it may be applied as an epithet to things that are endless, but the idea of endlessness in all such cases comes not from the epithet, but only because it is inherent in the object to which the epithet is applied, as in the case of God.....

NOTE:

The word "Aionios" by itself, whether adjective or substantive, never means endless"--Canon Farrar -

"The conception of eternity, in the Semitic languages, is that of a long duration and series of ages."--Rev. J. S. Blunt-- Dictionary of Theology.

" 'Tis notoriously known," says Bishop Rust, "that the Jews, whether writing in Hebrew or Greek, do by 'olam' (the Hebrew word corresponding to "aion"), and aion mean any remarkable period or duration, whether it be of life, or dispensation, or polity."

The word aion is never used in Scripture, or anywhere else, in the sense of endlessness (vulgarly called eternity), it always meant, both in Scripture and out, a period of time; else how could it have a plural--how could you talk of the aeons and aeons of aeons as the Scripture does? -C. Kingsley-

So the secular games, celebrated every century were called "eternal" by the Greeks.--(See HUET, Orig. 2 Page 162)

...Much has been written on the import of the aeonian (eternal) life. Altogether to exclude, (with Maurice) the notion of time seems impracticable, and opposed to the general usage of the New Testament (and of the Septuagint). But while this is so, we may fully recognize that the phrase "eternal life" (aeonian life) does at times pass into a region above time, a region wholly moral and spiritual. Thus, in Saint John, the aeonian life (eternal life), of which he speaks, is a life not measured by duration, but a life in the unseen, life in God. Thus, e.g., God's commandment is life eternal,--ib. 17.3, and Christ is the eternal life.--1 John 1:2, 20.

Quality & Quantity

Admitting, then, the usual reference of aionios to time, we note in the word a tendency to rise above this idea, to denote quality, rather than quantity, to indicate the true, the spiritual, in opposition to the unreal, or the earthly. In this sense the eternal is now and here. Thus "eternal" punishment is one thing, and "everlasting" punishment a very different thing, and so it is that our Revisers have substituted for "everlasting" the word "eternal" in every passage in the New Testament, where aionios is the original word. Further, if we take the term strictly, eternal punishment is impossible, for "eternal" in strictness has no beginning.

Aaronic Priesthood Long Ceased To Exist

Again, a point of great importance is this, that it would have been impossible for the Jews, as it is impossible for us, to accept Christ, except by assigning a limited--nay, a very limited duration--to those Mosaic ordinances which were said in the Old Testament to be "for ever," to be "everlasting" (aeonian). Every line of the New Testament, nay, the very existence of Christianity is thus in fact a proof of the limited sense of aionios in Scripture. Our Baptism in the Name of Jesus Christ, our Holy Communion, every prayer uttered in a Christian Church, or in our homes, in the name of the Lord Jesus: our hopes of being "for ever with the Lord"--these contain one and all an affirmation most real, though tacit, of the temporary sense of aionios.

Aionios Repeatedly Applied To Things That Have Long Ago Ceased To Exist

As a further illustration of the meaning of aion and aionios, let me point out that in the Greek version of the Old Testament (the Septuagint)--in common use among the Jews in our Lord's time, from which He and the Apostles usually quoted, and whose authority, therefore, should be decisive on this point--these terms are repeatedly applied to things that have long ceased to exist.

Thus

The Aaronic priesthood is said to be "everlasting," -Numb.25:13-

The land of Canaan is given as an "everlasting" possession, and "for ever" -Gen. 17:8...Gen. 18:15-

In Deut. 23:3, "for ever" is distinctly made an equivalent to "even to the tenth generation."

In Lamentations 5:19, "for ever and ever" is the equivalent of from "generation to generation."

The inhabitants of Palestine are to be bondsmen "for ever" -Lev. 25:46-

In Numb. 18:19, the heave offerings of the holy things are a covenant "for ever."

Caleb obtains his inheritance "for ever" -Joshua 14:9-

And David's seed is to endure "for ever," his throne "for ever," his house "for ever;" nay, the passover is to endure "for ever;" and in Isa. 32:14, the forts and towers shall be "dens for ever, until the spirit be poured upon us."

So in Jude 7, Sodom and Gomorrah are said to be suffering the vengeance of eternal (aeonian) fire, i.e., their temporal overthrow by fire, for they have a definite promise of final restoration.--(Ezek. 16:55)

Christ's Kingdom Is To Last Forever & Yet

And Christ's kingdom is to last "for ever," yet we are distinctly told that this very kingdom is to end.--(I Cor. 15:24) Indeed, quotation might be added to quotation, both from the Bible and from early authors, to prove this limited meaning of aion and its derivatives; but enough has probably been said to prove that it is wholly impossible, and indeed absurd, to contend that any idea of endless duration is necessarily or commonly implied by either aion or aionios.

NOTE:

Thus Josephus calls "aeonian," the temple of Herod, which was actually destroyed when he wrote. PHILO never uses aionios of endless duration.

Aion Either Means Endless Duration Or It Does Not

Further, if this translation of aionios as "eternal," in the sense of endless, be correct, aion must mean eternity, i.e., endless duration. But so to render it would reduce Scripture to an absurdity.

In the first place, you would have over and over again to talk of the "eternities." We can comprehend what "eternity" is, but what are the "eternities?" You cannot have more than one eternity. The doxology would run thus: "Thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory, unto the eternities."

In the case of the sin against the Holy Ghost, the translation would then be, "it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this eternity nor in that to come."

Our Lord's words, (Matt. 13:39), would then be, "the harvest is the end of the eternity," i.e., the end of the endless, which is to make our Lord talk nonsense.

Again, in Mark 4:19, the translation should be, "the cares," not of "this world," but "the cares of this eternity choke the word."

In Luke 16:8, "The children of this world," should be "the children of this eternity."

In 1 Cor. 10:11, the words, "upon whom the ends of the world are come," should be: "the ends of the eternities."

Take next, Gal. 1:4: "That He might deliver us from this present evil world," should run thus: "from this present evil eternity."

In 2 Tim. 4:10, the translation should be: "Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present eternity."

And "Now once at the end of the ages hath He been manifested," should read, on the popular view, "at the end of the eternities."

Let me state the dilemma clearly. Aion either means endless duration as its necessary, or at least its ordinary significance, or it does not. If it does, the following difficulties at once arise;

Difficulties

1. How, if it mean an endless period, can aion have a plural?

2. How came such phrases to be used as those repeatedly occurring in Scripture, where aion is added to aion, if aion is of itself infinite?

3. How come such phrases as for the "aion" or aions and beyond?--ton aiona kai ep aiona kai eti: eis tous aionas kai eti.--(see Sept. Ex. 15:18...Dan. 12:3...Micah 4:5)

4. How is it that we repeatedly read of the end of the aion?--Matt. 13:39-40-49;...Matt. 24:3...Matt. 28:20...1 Cor. 10:11...Hebr. 9:26.

5. Finally, if aion be infinite, why is it applied over and over to what is strictly finite? e.g. Mark 4:19...Acts 3:21...Rom. 12:2...1 Cor. 1:20...1 Cor. 2:6...1 Cor. 3:18, 10:11, etc. etc.

If Aion Is Not Infinite

But if aion be not infinite, what right have we to render the adjective aionios (which depends for its meaning on aion) by the terms "eternal" (when used as the equivalent of "endless") and "everlasting?"

Indeed our translators have really done further hurt to those who can only read their English Bible.

They have, wholly obscured a very important doctrine, that of "the ages." This when fully understood throws a flood of light on the plan of redemption, and the method of the divine working. Take a few instances which show the force and clearness gained, by restoring the true rendering of the words aion and aionios.

Turn to Matt. 24:3. There our version represents the disciples as asking "what should be the sign of the end of the world." It should be the end of the "age;" the close of the Jewish age marked by the fall of Jerusalem.

In Matt. 13:39-40-49, the true rendering is not the end of the "world," but of the "age," an important change.

So John 17:3, "this is life eternal," should be "the life of the ages," i.e., peculiar to those ages, in which the scheme of salvation is being worked out.

Or take Heb 5:9; Heb. 9:12; Heb. 13:20, "eternal salvation" should be "aeonian" or of the ages; "eternal redemption" is the redemption "of the ages;" the eternal covenant is the "covenant of the ages," the covenant peculiar to the ages of redemption.

In Eph. 3:11, "the eternal purpose" is really the purpose of "the ages," i.e., worked out in "the ages."

In Eph. 3:21, there occurs a suggestive phrase altogether obscured (as usual, where this word is in question), by our version, "until all the generations of the age of the ages." Thus it runs in the original, and it is altogether unfair to conceal this elaborate statement by merely rendering "throughout all ages."

In 1 Cor. 10:11 "the ends of the world" are the "ends of the ages." In 1 Cor. 2:6-7-8, the word aion is four times translated "world," it should be "age' or "ages" in all cases.

And here it is impossible to avoid asking how--assuming that aion does mean "world" in these cases--how it can yield, as an adjective, such a term as "everlasting?" If it mean "world," then the adjective should be "worldly," "of the world." And great force and freshness would be gained in our version by always adhering to the one rendering "age."

-Christ Triumphant by Rev. Thomas Allin-

Complete Text HERE

Aionios is the adjective of aion. An adjective CANNOT take on more force than the noun from which it is derived.

[FineLinen]

Zack: take a small season and compare what Eric. L. has presented with the following....

Dr. J.W. Hanson Aionios/ Olam/ Aion

HERE

An Analytical Study of Words By Louis Abbott

HERE

It is an axiom of grammer that an adjective derived from a noun cannot mean more that its parent word. It must retain the essential meaning pertaining to the noun....The adjective cannot take on a greater meaning than the noun from which it is derived. For example, hourly, an adjective, pertains to an hour, not a year.

[FineLinen]

Prof. Tayler Lewis

Dr. Edward Beecher has written a book on the Scriptural Doctrine of Retribution.

Dr. Beecher lived from 1803-1895 and was....

1. First president of the Illinois College.

2. Founded the Congregationalist.

3. Pastor of numerous Congregationalist Churches.

4. Professor of Biblical Exegesis at the Chicago Theological Seminary.

5. D.D. conferred on Henry Beecher by Marietta College (1841)

History Of Opinions On The Doctrine Of Retribution

HERE

We are indebted, for what we shall say on this version, to that eminent scholar Prof. Tayler Lewis. To see the full force of it, it is necessary to state first his own views of the word aionios. They are found in a profound development of the use of what he calls the Olamic or Aeonian words of the Scripture. He complains, and that justly, that their Scriptural use is hidden by our translation.

His views will be found on pp. 44-51 of Lange's "Commentary on Ecclesiastes," and also pp. 135-143 of the "Commentary on Genesis."

Views of Prof. Lewis

He very correctly assumes that aion has the sense of an age, that is, a period of time. He regards the boundless duration of God as filled with successive ages or dispensations. These ages are numberless before our world was created; during this world there are ages, and there will be numberless ages after its close.

Scriptural Names

The usual Scriptural names of these ages are Olam in Hebrew, and Aion in Greek. These words are, in themselves, wholly indefinite, and the ages may vary greatly in length. They are not measured by ordinary astronomical computations of time, as days, months, years.

See Lange's "Genesis," p. 141, note.

Use of the Ages

Now, in this state of things, two modes are conceivable of impressing the mind with the magnitude of the duration of God and his kingdom: to use simple negations of beginning or end, leaving eternity, past and future, an undivided blank, or, to fill the mind with the conception of innumerable ages, past or future, and to reduplicate the expression "by ages of ages."

He insists upon it that this latter mode of speaking is the Scriptural mode, and that it affects the mind more with approximate conceptions of eternity than what he calls conceptionless, negative words.

Neither Denotes Eternity

But he insists that this use of olam and aion, in the plural to denote ages, and ages of ages, implies of necessity that neither of the words, of itself, denotes eternity. He admits that these words are used to give an idea of eternity, as applied to God and his kingdom, while yet the ages that are reduplicated are themselves finite, but by their magnitude and number raise an impressive approximate conception of eternity.

See Lange's "Ecclesiastes," pp. 45, 50

Result

In view of these facts we need not be surprised at finding in Prof. Tayler Lewis the following clear development of the logical result of these views. He says:

The preacher, in contending with the Universalist and the Restorationist, would commit an error, and it may be suffer a failure in his argument, should he lay the whole stress of it on the etymological or historical significance of the words aion, aionios, and attempt to prove that of themselves they necessarily carry the meaning of endless duration.

Lange's "Ecclesiastes," p. 48

What, then, does aionios here mean? He says that it means pertaining to the age or world to come, taking world in the time-sense, and thus translates the passage. "These shall go away into the punishment [the restraint, imprisonment] of the world to come, and these into the life of the world to come," and he adds, emphatically, "that is all that we can etymologically or exegetically make of the word in this passage.

[FineLinen]

Dr. Beecher writes regarding St. Augustine....

Augustine knew "very little" of Greek... "I have learned very little of the Greek language, and almost nothing" (Contra literas Petilianni).....

Hence we need not be surprised that Augustine treats aionios as if it had the one simple sense endless. He did not seem to be aware that aion had many senses, and that therefore the adjective aionios, based on it, might also have many senses. He did not seem to be aware that it might mean pertaining to or existing in the coming age or world, as shown by Dr. Tayler Lewis, or that it could mean occurring at the opening of an age, as is shown by Herodian (iii., 8, eighteen), who calls the secular games celebrated at the close of one period and the beginning of another aionian games. He did not know that the word could mean having the characteristics of an age, or lasting through an age, or that, taking aion to denote a spirit, it could mean spiritual.

Our English word age has no adjective that can represent aionios in its range of meanings, and hence to translate it properly we are obliged to resort to periphrases. 

There may be no doubt cases in which it can imply endlessness.

If it relates to an age that is by concession endless, or if it relates to God as the God of all ages, and as therefore the aionian God – in such cases it implies the idea endless, but not from its own proper force, but from the age or ages to which it refers.

But to assert, as Augustine did, that it means endless in all cases and of necessity, is possible only to one who is ignorant of the meaning of aion and the usages of aionios, in the Greek language.

If Augustine had thoroughly studied the usages of the Greek language as to aion and aionios, and had compared them with those of the same words when transferred into the Latin language, he would have found a very striking and instructive coincidence between them. The Greek [Greek letters] was thus transferred. How was the transfer effected? Thus: It has a digamma after ai, which is equivalent to our v. This appears in the Latin word, and by the change of the diphthong ai into [Greek letters] , and [Greek letters] into um, as was usual in such cases, [Greek letters] was transferred into Latin as aevum; but the word in both cases is essentially the same.

How, then, is aevum used in Latin? Augustine would have found that it is not used to denote eternity, but life, lifetime, time, age, period, and the men of an age or period, just as [Greek letters] is in Greek.

I am aware that some lexicographers, among whom is Andrews, under the influence of Aristotle's derivation of [Greek letters], wrongly translated, introduce, as the first and original sense, eternity. But of this they give only a few alleged instances, and these are cases where the word means time, and an adjective is expressed or understood which gives it universality. Thus, Horace, "Odes," iii., 11, 35, 36, eloquently says of Hypermnestra, the only daughter of Danaus who refused to murder her husband on the bridal night, after promising to do so that she was

"Splendide mendax, et in omne virgo Nobilis aevum;"

that is, "a virgin gloriously false to her promise, and illustrious to every age." This implies eternity, though the word age does not mean it of its own force.

The four cases given by Andrews in his Lexicon are easily explained thus: And the great river of usage is at war with the idea of eternity, and shows that it could not have been the original and primitive sense. Facciolatus, also, than whom there is no higher authority, says that in aevum is the same as in omne aevum, that is, for every age, for all time, and thus sustains the position assumed by me.

Take, now, another word, based on this.

From aevum was formed aevitas, and by syncope this became aetas. What, now, does aetas denote? It is not even pretended that it ever means eternity. It denotes, like aion, life, the lifetime of man, an age, a space of time, time, the men of an age. These senses are abundantly illustrated by Andrews in his "Latin Lexicon."

Take, now, another case.

From the Latin aevum was formed the adjective aeviternus, synonymous with aionios. This, by syncope of the syllable vi, became aeternus, and was used in the Latin version of the words of Christ, as an equivalent to aionios. From this, too, comes our word eternal, which therefore has its roots in aion.

What, now, are the facts as to the Latin usage of the word aeternus?

I answer, in popular usage, it very rarely denotes endlessness. I have examined its usages in Virgil, of which there are at least twenty-six, and in other authors, and will state some facts.

It means, frequently, during life. Thus, in Plautus, "Captivi," iv., 1-13, "I hope that, because of this message, I shall obtain eternal food" (aeternum cibum). He did. His king was restored, and he had abundant food for life, not for eternity.

Again

(Most. i., 3, 37, eight). A friend says to a confiding young girl, enticed by a deceitful lover: "You are a fool to think that he will be an eternal friend to you" (that is, a friend for life); "I warn you that, by reason of increasing age and satiety, he will desert you."

Again

("Captivi," iv., 2, 117), "I will give you eternal food, if you speak the truth." In this case, food for eternity was out of the question. Food for life was the meaning. Hence we see clearly that the meaning life, in aion, still lived in the Latin aeternus.

In view of these cases, Facciolatus, in his great "Lexicon," says, "It is very frequently used to denote what endures for life."

A striking instance occurs in Cicero ("Catiline," iv., 5), in the debate on the punishment of Lentulus, an associate of Catiline. In that, Cicero speaks thus of the opinion of Caesar, that he should be confined for life, "That very mild and merciful man doesn't hesitate to consign P. Lentulus to eternal darkness and chains." Caesar had just disavowed a belief in a future life, in the hearing of Cicero. All that eternal so used can mean, is, for life.

Ovid says ("Trist.," v., 2, 15), "Telephus, wasted by an eternal disease, would have died, if the right hand that wounded him had not brought a cure." Telephus was wounded by Achilles, and cured by him by the rust of the wounding spear.

Virgil ("Georgies," ii., 400) says, "The soil must eternally be pulverized by cross-ploughing," i.e., this must be a fixed and stated usage in agriculture.

Of Cerberus, vi., 401, he says that "he is eternally barking." He speaks of eternal leagues between lenders, or between nations, and of the eternal fires of Vesta.

To Camilla he ascribes an "eternal love of weapons and of virginity," that is, a love for life.

He comes nearest to an absolute eternity in speaking of the immortality of Juturna ("Aeneid,""xii., 879), and the power of the gods ("Aeneid,""i., 2, 30; x. eighteen).

But here the things spoken of impart this sense to the word. Horace ("Ep.," i., 10, 41), says of one who cannot live without riches, and fears poverty as the greatest evil, "He will be an eternal slave because he does not know how to live on a little." Here the sense is a slave for life. Pliny, xiii., 5, 11, speaks of the "eternity of the wood of the cedar-tree."

Virgil ("Aeneid,""ii., 154), calls the sun, moon, and stars eternal fires. So, by an inspired writer, the same worlds are called eternal. And yet both writers believed that they would pass away and be dissolved.

Such cases represent the popular use of the word. But in Cicero's philosophical writings, when he is under the influence of the Greek philosophers, he introduces the philosophical sense of an absolute eternity which they originated in later ages.

Still another word used in translating aion in the Latin version deserves notice.

Seculum is used by Jerome in translating the reduplications of [Greek letters], aions of aions, which our version renders forever and ever; that is, truly translated, for ages of ages. In the book of Revelation this expression occurs fourteen times. What, now, is the rendering of Jerome? He in every instance renders it "secula seculorum."

What, now, is the sense of seculum in Latin? Does it ever mean eternity?

No. It means a race or generation of animals or of men; then a lifetime; then an age; then the men of an age; then an indefinite period – of marked characteristics, as "in our age."

Thus the expression in secula seculorum may be rendered for generations of generations, or for ages of ages.

Indeed, our expression forever and ever, traced to its original sense, means "for an age and an age."

For our word ever is, in fact, the old Greek word aion, or the Latin aevum, modified by transmission to our times. (See Webster's "Dictionary.")

To our expression "forever and ever" we attach the idea of endlessness, by usage and habit. But, in fact, as a translation of the Bible, it means no more than the Greek for aions of aions, or the Latin for secula of secula, or the English for ages of ages. If Augustine had fully understood the Greek usages of aion and aionios, and the Latin usages of aevum, aestas, aeternus and seculum, he would have placed no stress on aion, or aionios, or aeternus, as proving endless punishment.

But it so happened that the Latin school of Augustine, in Africa, in which the leading writers were not Greek scholars, was mainly instrumental in establishing the doctrine of endless punishment on this false basis. Even if the doctrine were true, the basis on which they placed it was false.

[FineLinen]

Let's meet the author of the article shall we?

http://www.ovrlnd.com/MainPage/TheWebmaster/abouttheauthor.html

Eric: good to see your smiling face again. I have a couple of questions for you before continuing.

1. What does "prov aionios/aijwvnioß crovnoß" mean?

Prov= _______________?

aijwvnioß= Everlasting/Eternal/Without beginning or ending?

crovnoß= _______________?

"To go on punishing for ever, simply for punishment's sake, shocks every sentiment of justice. And the case is so much worse when the punishment is really the prolongation of evil, when it is but making evil endless." -Christ Triumphant-

Question # 2.

A. What is the primary meaning of kolasis in our Lord's words of St. Matt. 25:46?

B. What are the qualifications for everlasting/ aionios kolasis/ correction. Is this correction that never ends or correction that leads to change and transformation?

Question #3

What are the qualification (s) for aionios kolasis and aionios zoe?

Greek has a word and an expression that means "eternal", but αιωνιον is not one of them. αιωνιον is an age (singular). The punishment in St. Matthew 25, comes from the word κολαζω which means to prune and is used in a disciplinary sense and not a penal one. If I remember correctly, μωρια would be used in a penal (vengeance) sense.

The Latin Vulgate translated αιωνιον as "aeternus" from which we get the English words eternal and eternity. The KJV translators, instead of going back to the Greek, went to the Latin Vulgate and translated "aeternus". Translating that as "eternal" is based on Latin theology (Roman Catholicism). It was absolutely essential to Augustinian theology with its blightening emphasis on the doctrine of predestinarianism to mistranslate the Greek adjective αιωνιον, and put on it a meaning which the Greek will not for a moment allow in its respective applications to salvation and judgment.

The Greek word for "everlasting" is αιδιοις. Remember, "eternal" means without beginning or end. Only God is eternal. Everlasting means without end. αιωνιον means age, but αιδιοις (plural) means "everlasting" or perpetual. The other way of saying "everlasting" is εις τους αιωνας των αιωνων. One is an adjective that means "everlasting", the other is a noun.

Scripture talks about everlasting life, but when it's talking about "aionian" life, that's not it. This passage is talking about age-lasting life and age-lasting punishment (chastisement).

Sheep & Goats

Numbers 18:17 "But the firstling of a cow, or the firstling of a sheep, or the firstling of a goat, thou shalt not redeem; they are holy: thou shalt sprinkle their blood upon the altar, and shalt burn their fat for an offering made by fire, for a sweet savour unto the LORD."

Goats are clean animals. If you look in the OT, consistently it makes statements such as the one in Exodus 12:5: "Your lamb shall be without blemish, a male of the first year: ye shall take it out from the sheep, or from the goats:"

The lamb for the sacrifice could come from sheep or goats. Goats are clean. If goats are a clean animal that doesn't need redeeming throughout Scripture, why would He suddenly change His mind that they are unclean in this one instance?

I know of few serious Biblical scholars that recommend Strong's for serious study. Strong's is better than nothing, though. Dana and Mantey's "A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament" is a good work. Moulton and Milligan's "The Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament" is good. "The Analytical Greek Lexicon" is good. William D. Ramey's series is excellent. Griesbach, Tischendorf, and any of a number of serious Greek students that have no pre-conceived agenda to push are good.

Accurate translations are available, although some are pricey. Rotherham's is quite nicely translated, but not quite as readable. Young's is good. Weymouth's is good. Green's is nicely written, but tranlates along the KJV instead of the Greek. www.inthebeginning.org has some excellent resources. www.concordant.info has an excellent freeware program that concordantly translates the NT, without pre-conceived bias.

Comparing the papyrii, Aristotle, Plato, Hericlitus and others are also good ways to get a grasp on the language itself.

Even in the original language, there are minor differences between serious scholars, but why add to the confusion with mis-translating words and making them say something that the Greek will not at all accept? αιωνιον cannot by any sane reason (other than general concensus based on Catholicism) be translated as "eternal". Unless the Holy Spirit made a mistake when the writers were told what to write, this passage is not referring to eternal life or everlasting life. We know it's not referring to eternal life; only God is eternal.

Jesus Christ draws distinction between sheep and goats. Sheep and goats are both clean animals. The sheep are righteous and the goats aren't, but they are both groups of believers. Those on the right hand go to age-lasting reward, those on the left to age-lasting chastisement.

[FineLinen]

Everlasting: Dr. Robert Young Analytical Concordance Of The Bible -Part 1 of 3-

1. Duration, continuity = d[

(Isa. 9:6 & Hab. 3:6)

2. Age, Age-Lasting = olam ~lw[

(59 References)

3. Age, Age-Lasting = `alam ~l[

(Dan. 4:3, 34; 7:14; 7:2)

4. What is before in time and place = Qedem ~dq

(Hab. 1:12)

5. Perpetual (Aidios)

Jude 6

6. Age-lasting aijwvnioß

Matt. 18:8, 19:29, 25:41, 25:46

Luke 16:9, 18:30

John 3:16, 3:36 4:14, 5:24, 6:27, 6:40, 6:47, 12:50

Acts 16:46

Romans 6:22, 16:26

Galations 6:8

2 Thess. 1:9, 2:16

1 Timothy 1:16, 6:16

Hebrews 13:20

2 Peter 1:11

Revelation 14:6

[FineLinen]

Part 2 of 3

Age, Age-Lasting = olam ~lw[

Genesis =

9:16

17:7,8,13,19

21:33

48:4

Exodus =

40: 15

Leviticus =

16:34

24:8

Numbers

25:13

Deuteronomy

33:27

2 Samuel

23:5

1 Chronicles

16:17

Psalms

24:7,9

41:13

90:2

93:2

100:5

103:17

105:10

106:48

112:6

119:142, 144

139:24

145:13

[FineLinen]

Everlasting: Dr. Robt. Young Part 3 of 3

Age, Age-Lasting = olam ~lw[

Proverbs =

8:23

10:25

Isaiah =

24:5

26:4

33:14

35:10

40:28

45:17

51:11

54:8

55:3, 13

56:5

60:19,20

61:7,8

63:12, 16

Jeremiah

10:10

20:11

23:40

31:5

32:40

Ezekiel

16:60

37:26

Daniel

9:24

12:2

Micah

5:2

Habakkuk

3:6

[FineLinen]

Aion never has, never will mean everlasting, even when used in conjunction with the Eternal One. He is the God of the ages, but the foundation of His endlessness is not on the basis of aion or aionios!

In the Greek Scriptures endlessness is never expressed in terms of eons or of that which is eonian. The Scriptures never speak of "the endless eons of eternity."

Endlessness=

Endlessness is expressed by the use of negatives such as "not", "no not", "un", and "less." For example "Of His kingdom there shall be no end" ouk estai telos (Luke 1:33); "endless life" akatalutou (Heb. 7:16); "endless genealogies" aperantois (1 Tim. 1:4) and "nevermore" ou me eti (Rev. 18:21-23)

Greek Words That Denote Endlessness

Amarantos= Unfading=

Not fading away. Perennial

Amarantinos=

Unfading.

Composed of amaranth. A flower so called because it never withers or fades, and when plucked off revives if moistened by water.

Akatalutos=

Endless

Not subject to destruction.

Indissoluable.

Aphthartos=

Incorruptible. Not subject to decay.

Imperishable.

Athanasia=

Immortality. Undying

Literally: deathlessness.

Aphtharsia=

Incorruption/ perpetuity.

NOTE:

There is no word in Scripture, Old or New Covenant, that expresses our idea of eternal. These words "denote" endlessness.

"It is an axiom of grammer that an adjective derived from a noun cannot mean more that its parent word. It must retain the essential meaning pertaining to the noun....The adjective cannot take on a greater meaning than the noun from which it is derived. For example, hourly, an adjective, pertains to an hour, not a year."

"In considering these phrases it is necessary to premise that in spiritual things we must guard against all conclusions which rest upon the notions of succession and duration. 'Eternal life' is that which St. Paul speaks of as 'e outos Zoe the life which is life indeed, and 'e zoe tou theou, the life of God. It is not an endless duration of being in time, but being of which time is not a measure. We have indeed no powers to grasp the idea except through forms and images of sense. These must be used, but we must not transfer them as realities to another order." -Bishop Westcott-

[chuckt]

Jesus Christ draws distinction between sheep and goats. Sheep and goats are both clean animals. The sheep are righteous and the goats aren't, but they are both groups of believers. Those on the right hand go to age-lasting reward, those on the left to age-lasting chastisement.

YES, this is so true and any time i try and show it to a fundie or  traditional orthodox beleiver they just cant see it, even when i say just read the whole chapter real slow, they cant and wont see it, very frustrating, how wonderfull when all this wood hay and stubble is burned away!!

God bless
chuckt.

ps.

lots of good info in this thread...thanks!!

[FineLinen]

Jesus Christ draws distinction between sheep and goats. Sheep and goats are both clean animals. The sheep are righteous and the goats aren't, but they are both groups of believers. Those on the right hand go to age-lasting reward, those on the left to age-lasting chastisement.

YES, this is so true and any time i try and show it to a fundie or  traditional orthodox beleiver they just cant see it, even when i say just read the whole chapter real slow, they cant and wont see it..

Chuckt: Blindness is an awful thing, but thank God the Lord Jesus Christ still walks down dusty roads stopping for those who cry out, Jesus Son of David have mercy on me. The poor disciples tried to quiet him, but the more they tried the louder he became, Jesus Son of David have mercy on me.

The context of our Master's words in St. Matt. 25 are regarding virgins, servants of the master, and lastly, two clean animals sheep and goats. Some of the virgins are unprepared, but virgins they are, standing in need of oil. The servants of the master are servants, but unwise servants who have not invested the master's funds appropriately. And the goats and the sheep? I have yet to have one of these fundamentalist Christians ever answer me this question? What are the qualifications for everlasting punishment/ aionios kolasis? Is it rebellion, failure to receive Christ into one's life, disobedience, lawlessness, sin, what does the Master of the reconciliation declare are the qualifications for everlasting kolasis and everlasting zoe according to the context of St. Matthew 25? The problem is, of course, that what the Master declares and what we think He aught to be saying are in two worlds completely. Yep, the sheep and the goats are both groups of believers....both of them.

Jonathan Mitchell -The Sheep & The Kids-

HERE

[FineLinen]

Eric: If aionios means everlasting or eternal, without beginning and ending as you would have us believe, what does "prov aionios/aijwvnioß crovnoß" mean?

Prov= _______________?

aijwvnioß= Everlasting/Eternal/Without beginning or ending?

crovnoß= _______________?

In the Greek Scriptures endlessness is never expressed in terms of eons or of that which is eonian. The Scriptures never speak of "the endless eons of eternity."

Endlessness=

Endlessness is expressed by the use of negatives such as "not", "no not", "un", and "less." For example "Of His kingdom there shall be no end" ouk estai telos (Luke 1:33); "endless life" akatalutou (Heb. 7:16); "endless genealogies" aperantois (1 Tim. 1:4) and "nevermore" ou me eti (Rev. 18:21-23)

The noun time in the Koine is chronos/crovnoß, as per "time shall be no longer" (Rev. 10:16) or crovnoß ouj e[eti. The adjective of time is proskairos, not timeless, but a combination of prov and kairos thus....

Proskairos=

For a season.

Enduring only for a while.

Temporary.

Temporary, transient, "for a season" see Hebr. 11:25 also temporal/ time & while.

Time=

HERE

Season=

HERE

The noun aion never ever means endless. The root for the adjective aionios cannot hold more force than the noun on which it stands. That is not conjecture, nor wishful thinking, but a solid fact. The noun "time" is kairos in the koine & 

Time= kairos/ kairovß=

Due measure. A measure of time.

A larger or smaller portion of time.

A limited period of time.

The state and events of time.

HERE

Time= crovnoß/=

Time either long or short.

HERE

Prov=

Before

HERE

Let us put it together shall we, and you please tell us what before aijwvnioß crovnoß means to you?

[FineLinen]

Eric: you will note that there is absolutely no information that indicates Dr. Marvin Vincent was a believer in the Restitution of all things, but Dr. Vincent knows exactly what aion and aionios means.

Dr. Marvin Vincent -oleqron aiwnion-

http://www.godrules.net/library/vincent/vincent.htm

2 Thess. 1:9

"Shall be punished (dikhn tisousin). The verb (N.T.o .) means to pay or render. Lit. shall pay penalty.

Everlasting destruction (oleqron aiwnion). The phrase nowhere else in N.T. In LXX, 4 Macc. x. 15. Rev. properly, eternal destruction. It is to be carefully noted that eternal and everlasting are not synonymous.

Oleqron aijwnion= eternal destruction

Aiwn transliterated eon, is a period of time of longer or shorter duration, having a beginning and an end, and complete in itself. Aristotle (peri oujranou, i. 9, 15) says: "The period which includes the whole time of each one's life is called the eon of each one." Hence it often means the life of a man, as in Homer, where one's life (aiwn) is said to leave him or to consume away (Il. v. 685; Od. v. 160). It is not, however, limited to human life; it signifies any period in the course of events, as the period or age before Christ; the period of the millennium; the mytho-logical period before the beginnings of history.

The word has not "a stationary and mechanical value" (De Quincey).

It does not mean a period of a fixed length for all cases. There are as many eons as entities, the respective durations of which are fixed by the normal conditions of the several entities. There is one eon of a human life, another of the life of a nation, another of a crow's life, another of an oak's life. The length of the eon depends on the subject to which it is attached.

It is sometimes translated world; world representing a period or a series of periods of time. See Matt. xii. 32; xiii. 40, 49; Luke i. 70; 1 Corinthians i. 20; ii. 6; Eph. i. 21. Similarly oiJ aijwnev the worlds, the universe, the aggregate of the ages or periods, and their contents which are included in the duration of the world. 1 Cor. ii. 7; x. 11; Heb. i. 2; ix. 26; xi. 3.

The word always carries the notion of time, and not of eternity.

It always means a period of time. Otherwise it would be impossible to account for the plural, or for such qualifying expressions as this age, or the age to come. It does not mean something endless or everlasting. To deduce that meaning from its relation to ajei is absurd; for, apart from the fact that the meaning of a word is not definitely fixed by its derivation, ajei does not signify endless duration. When the writer of the Pastoral Epistles quotes the saying that the Cretans are always (aei) liars (Tit. i. 12), he surely does not mean that the Cretans will go on Iying to all eternity. See also Acts vii. 51; 2 Cor. iv. 11; vi. 10; Heb. iii. 10; 1. Peter iii. 15. Aei means habitually or continually within the limit of the subject's life. In our colloquial dialect everlastingly is used in the same way. "The boy is everlastingly tormenting me to buy him a drum."

In the New Testament the history of the world is conceived as developed through a succession of eons. A series of such eons precedes the introduction of a new series inaugurated by the Christian dispensation, and the end of the world and the second coming of Christ are to mark the beginning of another series. See Eph. iii. 11. Paul contemplates eons before and after the Christian era. Eph. i. 21; ii. 7; iii. 9, 21; 1 Corinthians x. 11; comp. Heb. ix. 26. He includes the series of eons in one great eon, oJ aijwn twn aijwnwn the eon of the eons (Eph. iii. 21); and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews describes the throne of God as enduring unto the eon of the eons (Heb. i. 8). The plural is also used, eons of the eons, signifying all the successive periods which make up the sum total of the ages collectively. Rom. xvi. 27; Gal. i. 5; Philip. iv. 20, etc.

This plural phrase is applied by Paul to God only. The adjective aijwniov in like manner carries the idea of time. Neither the noun nor the adjective, in themselves, carry the sense of endless or everlasting.

They may acquire that sense by their connotation, as, on the other hand, ajidiov, which means everlasting, has its meaning limited to a given point of time in Jude 6. Aiwniov means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods. Thus the phrase eijv ton aijwna, habitually rendered forever, is often used of duration which is limited in the very nature of the case. See, for a few out of many instances, LXX, Exod. xxi. 6; xxix. 9; xxxii. 13; Josh. xiv. 9; 1 Sam. viii. 13; Lev. xxv. 46; Deut. xv. 17; 1 Chronicles xxviii. 4. See also Matt. xxi. 19; John xiii. 8; 1 Cor. viii. 13. The same is true of aijwniov. Out of 150 instances in LXX, four-fifths imply limited duration. For a few instances see Gen. xlviii. 4; Numbers x. 8; xv. 15; Prov. xxii. 28; Jon. ii. 6; Hab. iii. 6; Isa. lxi. 17.

[quotee]Words which are habitually applied to things temporal or material can not carry in themselves the sense of endlessness. Even when applied to God, we are not forced to render aijwniov everlasting. Of course the life of God is endless; but the question is whether, in describing God as aijwniov,. it was intended to describe the duration of his being, or whether some different and larger idea was not contemplated.[/quote]

That God lives longer than men, and lives on everlastingly, and has lived everlastingly, are, no doubt, great and significant facts; yet they are not the dominant or the most impressive facts in God's relations to time. God's eternity does not stand merely or chiefly for a scale of length. It is not primarily a mathematical but a moral fact. The relations of God to time include and imply far more than the bare fact of endless continuance. They carry with them the fact that God transcends time; works on different principles and on a vaster scale than the wisdom of time provides; oversteps the conditions and the motives of time; marshals the successive eons from a point outside of time, on lines which run out into his own measureless cycles, and for sublime moral ends which the creature of threescore and ten years cannot grasp and does not even suspect.

There is a word for everlasting if that idea is demanded. That aijwniov occurs rarely in the New Testament and in LXX does not prove that its place was taken by aijwniov. It rather goes to show that less importance was attached to the bare idea of everlastingness than later theological thought has given it. Paul uses the word once, in Rom. i. 20, where he speaks of "the everlasting power and divinity of God." In Rom. xvi. 26 he speaks of the eternal God (tou aiwniou qeou); but that he does not mean the everlasting God is perfectly clear from the context. He has said that "the mystery" has been kept in silence in times eternal (cronoiv aiwnioiv), by which he does not mean everlasting times, but the successive eons which elapsed before Christ was proclaimed. God therefore is described as the God of the eons, the God who pervaded and controlled those periods before the incarnation. To the same effect is the title oJ basileuv twn aijwnwn the King of the eons, applied to God in 1 Timothy i. 17; Apoc. xv. 3; comp. Tob. xiii. 6, 10.

The phrase pro cronwn aijwniwn before eternal times (2 Tim. i. 9; Tit. i. 2), cannot mean before everlasting times. To say that God bestowed grace on men, or promised them eternal life before endless times, would be absurd. The meaning is of old, as Luke i. 70. The grace and the promise were given in time, but far back in the ages, before the times of reckoning the eons.

Zwh aijwniov eternal life, which occurs 42 times in N.T., but not in LXX, is not endless life, but life pertaining to a certain age or eon, or continuing during that eon. I repeat, life may be endless. The life in union with Christ is endless, but the fact is not expressed by aijwniov.

Kolasiv aijwniov, rendered everlasting punishment (Matt. xxv. 46), is the punishment peculiar to an eon other than that in which Christ is speaking. In some cases zwh aijwniov does not refer specifically to the life beyond time, but rather to the eon or dispensation of Messiah which succeeds the legal dispensation. See Matt. xix. 16; John v. 39. John says that zwh aijwniov is the present possession of those who believe on the Son of God, John iii. 36; v. 24; vi. 47, 64. The Father's commandment is zwh aijwviov, John xii. 50; to know the only true God and Jesus Christ is zwh aijwniov, John xvii. 3.

Bishop Westcott very justly says, commenting upon the terms used by John to describe life under different aspects: "In considering these phrases it is necessary to premise that in spiritual things we must guard against all conclusions which rest upen the notions of succession and duration.

'Eternal life' is that which St. Paul speaks of as hJ ontwv zwh the life which is life indeed, and hJ zwh tou qeou the life of God. It is not an endless duration of being in time, but being of which time is not a measure. We have indeed no powers to grasp the idea except through forms and images of sense. These must be used, but we must not transfer them as realities to another order." Thus, while aijwniov carries the idea of time, though not of endlessness, there belongs to it also, more or less, a sense of quality. Its character is ethical rather than mathematical. The deepest significance of the life beyond time lies, not in endlessness, but in the moral quality of the eon into which the life passes. It is comparatively unimportant whether or not the rich fool, when his soul was required of him (L. xii. 20), entered upon a state that was endless. The principal, the tremendous fact, as Christ unmistakably puts it, was that, in the new eon, the motives, the aims, the conditions, the successes and awards of time counted for nothing. In time, his barns and their contents were everything; the soul was nothing. In the new life the soul was first and everything, and the barns and storehouses nothing. The bliss of the sanctified does not consist primarily in its endlessness, but in the nobler moral conditions of the new eon, - the years of the holy and eternal God. Duration is a secondary idea. When it enters it enters as an accompaniment and outgrowth of moral conditions.

In the present passage it is urged that oleqron destruction points to an unchangeable, irremediable, and endless condition. If this be true, if oleqrov is extinction, then the passage teaches the annihilation of the wicked, in which case the adjective aijwniov is superfluous, since extinction is final, and excludes the idea of duration.

Ajpollumi/ apollumi Linked with Renewal

But oleqrov does not always mean destruction or extinction. Take the kindred verb ajpollumi to destroy, put an end to, or in the middle voice, to be lost, to perish. Peter says, "the world being deluged with water, perished" (ajpolountai 2 Peter iii. 6); but the world did not become extinct, it was renewed. In Heb. i. 11, 12 quoted from Psalm 102, we read concerning the heavens and the earth as compared with the eternity of God, "they shall perish" (apolountai). But the perishing is only preparatory to change and renewal. "They shall be changed" (allaghsontai). Comp. Isa. li. 6, 16; lxv. 17; lxvi. 22; 2 Pet. iii. 13; Apoc. xxi. 1. Similarly, "the Son of man came to save that which was lost" (apolwlov), Luke xix. 10. Jesus charged his apostles to go to the lost (apolwlota) sheep of the house of Israel, Matt. x. 6, comp. xv. 24. "He that shall lose (apolesh) his life for my sake shall find it," Matt. xvi. 25. Comp. Luke xv. 6, 9, 32.

In this passage the word destruction is qualified. It is "destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power, " at his second coming, in the new eon. In other words, it is the severance, at a given point of time, of those who obey not the gospel from the presence and the glory of Christ. Aiwniov may therefore describe this severance as continuing during the millennial eon between Christ's coming and the final judgment; as being for the wicked prolonged throughout that eon and characteristic of it, or it may describe the severance as characterizing or enduring through a period or eon succeeding the final judgment, the extent of which period is not defined. In neither case is aijwniov to be interpreted as everlasting or endless.

[FineLinen]

Andrew Jukes

Every scholar knows that the expressions, "ages,"

"to the ages,"

"age of the ages,"

and "ages of the ages,"

are unlike anything which occurs in the heathen Greek writers.

The reason is, that the inspired writers, and they alone, understood the mystery and purpose of the "ages." They, or at least the Spirit which spake by them, saw that there would be a succession of "ages," a certain number of which constituted another greater "age." 

It seems to me that when they simply intended a duration of many "ages," they wrote "to the ages."

When they had in view a greater and more comprehensive "age," including in it many other subordinate "ages," they wrote "to the age of ages."

When they intended the longer "age" alone, without regard to its constituent parts, they wrote "to an aeonial age"; this form of expression being a Hebraism, exactly equivalent to "age of the ages:" like "liberty of glory," for "glorious liberty," (Rom.viii. 21,) and "body of our vileness," for "our vile body." (Phil. iii. 21.)

When they intended the several comprehensive "ages" collectively, they wrote "to the ages of ages."

Each varying form is used with a distinct purpose and meaning.

All Ages Are Not Endless

At any rate, and whatever the future "ages" may be, those past (and St. Paul speaks of "the ends" of some,) are clearly not endless; and the language of Scripture as to those to come seems to teach that they are limited, since Christs mediatorial kingdom, which is "for the ages of ages," must yet be "delivered up to the Father, that God may be all in all." (Compare Rev. xi. 15, and 1 Cor. xv. 24.)

And the fact that in Johns vision, which describes the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gives Him, our Lord is called "Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending," (Rev. xxi. 6.) seems to imply an end to the peculiar manifestation of Him as King and Priest, under which special offices the Revelation shews Him, offices which, as they involve lost ones to be saved and rebels ruled over, may not be needed when the lost are saved and reconciled.

Would it not have been better therefore, and more respectful to the Word of God, had our Translators been content in every place to give the exact meaning of the words, which they render "for ever," or "for ever and ever," but which are simply "for the age," or "for the ages of ages;" and ought they not in other passages, where the form of expression in reference to these "ages" is marked and peculiar, to have adhered to the precise words of Holy Scripture?

I have already referred to the passage of St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Ephesians, which in our Version is rendered "throughout all ages, world without end," but which is literally, "to all generations of the age of ages." (Eph. iii. 21.)

But even more remarkable are the words, in St. Peters Second Epistle, which our Version translates "for ever;" but which are literally "for the day of the age;"

NOTE:

2 Pet. iii. 18; this phrase, which, I may add here, is an exact literal translation of the words in Micah v. 2, and which in our Authorized Version are translated "from everlasting" the key to which may perhaps be found in a preceding verse of the same chapter, where the Apostle says, that "one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (Verse 8.)

These and other similar forms of expression cannot have been used without a purpose. It is, therefore, a matter of regret that our Translators should not have rendered them exactly and literally; for surely the words which Divine Wisdom has chosen must have a reason, even where readers and translators lack the light to apprehend it.

The "ages," therefore, are periods in which God works, because there is evil and His rest is broken by it, but which have an end and pass away, when the work appointed to be done in them has been accomplished. The "ages," like the "days" of creation, speak of a prior fall: they are the "times" in which God works, because He cannot rest in sin and misery. His perfect rest is not in the "ages," but beyond them, when the mediatorial kingdom, which is "for the ages of ages," (Rev. xi. 15.) is "delivered up," (1 Cor. xv. 24.) and Christ, by whom all things are wrought in the ages, goes back to the glory which He had "before the age-times,"

NOTE:

2 Tim. i. 9; and Tit. i. 2; translated, in our Version, "before the world began." The Vulgate translation here is, "Ante saecularia tempora," which is as literal a rendering as possible.

A Saviour For Yesterday, Today & For The Ages

The words "Jesus Christ, (that is, Anointed Saviour,) the same yesterday, to-day, and for the ages," (Heb. xiii. 8.) imply that through these "ages" a Saviour is needed, and will be found, as much as "to-day" and "yesterday." It will I think too be found, that the adjective (aionios) founded on this word, whether applied to life," "punishment," "redemption," "covenant," "times," or even "God" Himself, is always connected with remedial labour, and with the idea of "ages" as periods in which God is working to meet and correct some awful fall.

Thus the "aeonial covenant," (Heb. xiii. 20.) (I must coin a word, to show what is the term used in the original,) is that which comprehends "the ages," during which "Jesus Christ is the same," that is, a Saviour; an office only needed for the fallen, for "they that are whole need not a physician." The "aeonial God," language found but once in the New Testament,

NOTE:

Rom. xvi. 25, 26. In this passage we read, first, of "the mystery kept secret from the aeonial times, (translated in our English version, "Since the world began,") and then of "the aeonial God," "by whose command this mystery is now made manifest."

The Same Word Used Twice In The Same Sentence

Is it not reasonable to conclude that the same word, twice used here in the same sentence, must in each case have the same sense. But as applied to "times," passing or past, aeonial cannot mean never-ending. In the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, the epithet aionios is only applied to God four times, in one of which the corresponding ____ of the Hebrew is not to be found; though in all the reference is direct, either to "the age of ages," or to Gods redeeming work as wrought through "the ages." The passages are Gen. xxi. 33, where after the birth of Isaac, the type of Christ, God is known by this name _____; then Isa. xxvi. 4, and xl. 28, in both which the context shews the reason for the epithet; and lastly Job xxiii. 12, in which passage the LXX. have given us aionios for ____ or Elohim, in the original; which name, as we see from a comparison of Gen. i. and ii., (in the former of which God is always Elohim, in the latter Jehovah Elohim,) refers to One who is working through periods of labour to change a ruined world, until His image is seen ruling it; a title not lost when the day of rest is reached, but to which another name, shewing what God is in Himself, is then added. In Exod. iii. 15, we read of Gods __________, that is, His name as connected with deliverance. I believe the word is never used but in this connection. See further below, Note 1, page 66.) refers, as the context shews, to God as working His secret of grace through "aeonial times," that is, successive worlds or "ages," in some of which "the mystery has been hid, but now is made manifest by the commandment of the aeonial God," that is, (if I err not,) the God who works through these "ages."

What Is Aionial Life?

And so of the rest, whether "redemption," (Heb. ix. 12.) "salvation," (Heb. v. 9.) "spirit," (Heb. ix. 14.) "fire," (Jude 7.) or "inheritance," (Heb. ix. 15.) all of which in certain texts are called "aeonial," the epithet seems to refer to this in the well-known words, "This is life eternal, (that is, the life of the age or of the ages,) that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom Thou hast sent"? (S. John xvii. 3.)

Does He not say here, that to know the only true God, as the sender of His Son to be a Saviour, and to know the Son as a Saviour and Redeemer, mark and constitute the renewed life which is peculiar to the ages?

Aeonial or eternal life therefore is not, as so many think, the living on and on for ever and ever. It is rather, as our Lord defines it, a life, the distinctive peculiarity of which is, that it has to do with a Saviour, and so is part of a remedial plan. This, as being our Lords own explanation of the word, is surely conclusive as to its meaning. But even had we not this key, the word carries with it in itself its own solution; for "aeonial" is simply "of the ages;" and the "ages," like the days of creation, as being periods in which God works, witness, not only that there is some fall to be remedied, but that God through these days or ages is working to remedy it.

NOTE:

As to the Old Testament use of the word "age" or "ages," (translated "for ever" in the English Version,) a few words may be added here. We have first the unconditional promise of God, that "the seed of Abraham shall inherit the land for ever; Exod. xxxii. 13.

The same words are used of the Aaronic priesthood; Exod. xl. 15;

of the office of the Levites; 1 Chron. xv. 2;

of the inheritance given to Caleb; Joshua xiv. 9;

of Ai being a desolation; Joshua viii. 28;

of the leprosy of Gehazi cleaving to his seed; 2 Kings v. 27;

of the heathen bondsmen whom Israel possessed, of whom it is said, "They shall be their bondsmen for ever;" Lev. xxv. 46.

The same words are also used of the curse to come on Israel for their disobedience:--"These curses shall come on thee, and pursue thee till thou be destroyed; and they shall be upon thee for a sign, and upon they children for ever;" Deut. xxviii. 45, 46.

so of Ammon and Moab it is said:--"Thou shalt not seek their peace for ever;" Deut. xxiii. 6; and again, "They shall not come into the congregation of the Lord for ever;" Deut xxiii. 3.

In all these and other similar instances, the Hebrew word Olam and its equivalent aion mean the age or dispensation.

In Exod. xxi. 6, where the ear of the servant, who will not go free, is bored, and he becomes a "servant for ever," the sense must necessarily be much more limited; as also in 1 Sam. i. 22.

It is to be observed also that not only the singular, as in 1 Kings ix. 3, and 2 Kings xxi. 7, but the plural is used in 1 Kings viii. 13, and 2 Chron. vi. 2, in reference to the temple at Jerusalem.

The double expression is variously translated by the LXX.; sometimes ________ as in Dan. xii. 3, where it is used of those "that turn many to righteousness;"

sometimes ________ as in Exod. xv. 18, where it is used of God;

sometimes _________ as in Psalm xlv. 2, where it is used of Christ and His kingdom; while in Micah iv. 7, the same Hebrew words here are translated by the LXX., and here only, by the plural.

More commonly, however, ________ is rendered simply _________ by the LXX., as in Gen. xiii. 15, Joshua iv. 7, and elsewhere.

Lastly, in Dan. vii. 18, we have both the singular and the plural form together.


The adjective aionios is used continually by the LXX.,--in reference to the Passover, Exod. xii. 14, 17,--

the tabernacle service, Exod. xxvii. 21,--

the priestly office of the sons of Aaron, Exod. xxviii. 43,--

the meat-offering, Lev. vi. 18,---

and other things of the Jewish dispensation, all of which are called aionios. 

So in Jer. xxiii. 40, we have _____________ , and ______________, used of the corrective judgments on Israel, whose restoration is also foretold.

I will only add that the very remarkable language of S. Paul, (2 Cor. iv. 17,) seems intended to add to the force of the word aionios, which could scarcely be, if aionios meant eternal.

Be this as it may, the adjective, "aeonial" or age-long, cannot carry a force or express a duration greater than that of the ages or "aeons" which it speaks of. If therefore these "ages" are limited periods, some of which are already past, while others, we know not how many, are yet to come, the word "aeonial" cannot mean strictly never-ending. Nor does this affect the true eternity of bliss of Gods elect, or of the redeemed who are brought back to live in God, and to be partakers of Christs "endless life," 

NOTE:

See Heb. vii. 16. The word here used of Christs resurrection-life, which we share with Him, is __________, translated in our Version "endless"; literally "indissoluble"; a word never used in Scripture respecting judgment or punishment, but only of that life which is beyond all dissolution.

Of whom it is said, "Neither can they die any more, for they are equal to the angels, and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection;" (S. Luke xx. 36.) for this depends on a participation in the divine nature, and upon that power which can "change these vile bodies, that they may be fashioned like unto Christs glorious body, according to the working whereby He is able to subdue even all things unto Himself." (Phil. iii. 21. See also 1 Cor xv. 53; Rom. viii. 29; Heb. vii. 16; xii. 28; 1 S. Pet. i. 3, 4, 5; 1 S. John iii. 2.

[FineLinen]

It is an axiom of grammer that an adjective derived from a noun cannot mean more that its parent word. It must retain the essential meaning pertaining to the noun....The adjective cannot take on a greater meaning than the noun from which it is derived. For example, hourly, an adjective, pertains to an hour, not a year.

AEI

The word aei from which aión is claimed to grow, is found eight times, (perhaps more, though I have not found it oftener) in the New Testament, and in no one instance does it mean endless. Mark xv:8; Acts vii:51; 2Cor. iv:11; vi:10, Titus, i:12; Heb. iii:10; 1Pet. iii:15; 2Pet. i:12. I give two instances.

The multitude desired Pilate to release a prisoner, Mark xv:8: "as he had ever done with them." Heb. iii:10: "They do always err in their heart." An endless duration growing out of a word used thus, would be a curiosity. It is alway, or always, or ever, in each text. Liddell and Scott give more than fifty compounds of aei.

Concerning Aristotle's use of the word in his famous sentence, "Life, an aión continuous and eternal," it is enough to say that if aión intrinsically meant endless, Aristotle never would have sought to strengthen the meaning by adding "continuous" and "eternal," any more than one would say, God has an eternity, continuous and endless. He has a life, an existence, an aión endless, just as man's aión on earth is limited; just as Idumea's smoke in the Old Testament is aiónios. Nor, had Aristotle considered aión to mean eternity, would he have said in this very passage: "the time of the life of each individual has been called his aión."

Cremer, Liddel and Scott, Donnegan, and Henry Stephens adopt the Aristotleian origin of the word. Grimm rejects it, and Robinson in his latest editions gives both etymologies without deciding between them. Stephens says: "Aristotle, and after him many other philosophers, as Plotinus and Proclus, introduced the etymology of aión from aei, and thus added the idea of eternity to the word."

But we have shown that the famous passage in Aristotle refers to God, (apo tou aei einai) and not to abstract duration. We have shown that aei is used eight times in the New Testament, and not in the sense of endless, once. We shall prove that Aristotle himself uniformly used the word in the sense of limited duration, and under the head of Classic Usage will hereafter prove that at the time the Old Testament was rendered into Greek, this was the only meaning the word had with any Greek writer. If aeión, is its origin, which is more than doubtful, it cannot mean more than continuous existence, the precise length to be determined by accompanying words. Adopt either derivation, and indefinite duration is the easy and natural meaning of the word, if we suffer ourselves to be guided by its etymology. Eternity can only be expressed by it when it is accompanied by other words, denoting endless duration, or by the name of Deity.

Etymology & Usage

All will agree that words may change their meaning, and therefore that etymology is an uncertain guide. If etymology point in one direction, and usage in another, the former must yield; but if both utter one fact, each reinforces and strengthens the other. This we have illustrated by the etymology of 'prevent.' Hundreds of words teach the same truth. Words start out with a certain meaning, and change it in process of time. If aión really meant eternity when it was first pronounced, it would not follow that it has this meaning now. That it had not that meaning at first would not hinder it from being thus used subsequently. Etymology proves nothing one way or the other, its evidence is but prima facie; usage is the only decisive authority. But etymology gives no warrant for applying the idea of eternity to the word.

[FineLinen]

Originally Posted by logos_x

This is the crux of the matter before us.

Our problem is what "eternity" has come to mean in modern English common usage. It has come to mean primarily infinite duration, and God is left out of that equation much of the time. It is thought that man himself continues forever, even apart from God.

But how could this be? I believe it could only "be" if it serves God's eternal purpose to redeem. If not, their continuation is the very antithesis of God's intentions.

God does not change in character. It is man that must change. If then, there be punishement it must be to affect a change, not to inflict endless suffering.

This throws a spotlight upon a grave error in much of Christian thought and teaching. We've turned God into a senseless, vindictive punisher of most of mankind throughout an infinite future, or else the killer of most of His creation. This depending on whether you believe that man is himself immortal and eternal, or not. We have taken "aionios" and applied it to man. And that is the problem.

If their is an "eternal" meaning to the word "aionios"...it is God alone who it could be applied to. Never to man alone regardless of his relationship with God upon his physical death.

Logos: You are absolutely correct. Our God punishes with an objective in view, not as an end in itself!

There are dual aspects to our Father's Realm. Tamiym/ 'ymt means to be consumed, destroyed, exhausted and spent, but also to be finished and made sound.

Kalal has the same meaning, linking destruction, being spent, exhausted, as well as to be finished and made sound.

Tamam, the root word of Tamiym means to be finished, complete, summed up, made whole: linked with to be consumed, exhausted, spent and destroyed.

Shalam/ ~IX, another expression of destruction, has the scope of being finished and ended, made good or whole, & being made sound, coupled with to be restored.

Shebar, rooted in Shabar, means breakout, and being brought to birth; and underlying new birth and breakout? To be crushed and broken. Again there is dual meaning in our Lord's words of destruction and re-creation.

The destructive Hebrew word Chalowph is rooted in being altered, renewed, changed, and to sprout again. It should also be noted that this is not just change, but change for the better.

In the New Compact we read of those individuals that are "fitted for destruction."

Fitted= Katartizo=

To mend what has been broken or rent.

To repair.

To put in order.

To arrange.

To adjust.

To strengthen.

To perfect.

Exceeding aionios

We read in the Sacred Secrets regarding our light affliction which is but for a moment: ie. the present light burden of our affliction. This light burden is working out, or achieving, a far more exceeding and aionios weight of glory...(kaq uperobolhn eiv uperbolhn aiwnion barov doxhv.)

The remarkable scholar of Koine, Dr. Marvin Vincent, writes....

More and more exceedingly an eternal weight. An expression after the form of Hebrew superlatives, in which the emphatic word is twice repeated. Literally: exceedingly unto excess.

A.T. Robertson records kat' uperbolhn eiv uperbolhn (more and more exceedingly) as like "piling Pelion on Ossa according to excess unto excess."

Aionios, without question, is transcending the scope of time into caliber. The Lord Jesus Christ defined what life aionios is. It is life that is knowing the Father and the Son. "This is life aionios, that we may know Thee the only true God and Jesus Christ...."

I have just been reading the words of Elhanan Winchester in Dialogues On The Universal Restoration where he writes...

This is what is called 'a better and enduring substance.' But what shall I say of the apostle's words in 2 Cor. 4:17? For our light affliction which is but for a moment, worketh for us, kath hyperbolen eis hyperbolen aionion baros doxes katergazetai emin: a glory exceeding aionion, or eternal, to an excess. Here is an hyperbole upon hyperbole; beyond eternal; a far more exceeding eternal weight of glory.

[jabcat]

 FINE LINEN!!  :2thumbs: :Urock: :ty:

[FineLinen]

"Forever"

Charles Welch, reprinted from The Berean Expositor vol. 1

An examination of the words thus translated in A.V, and R.V.

Following upon the study of the Scriptures as to the question of immortality, we instinctively turn to the following expressions which so often occur, viz., "everlasting," " for ever," etc. In the great majority of cases the word thus translated is the Greek word aion, or the Hebrew olam. The A.V. has rendered the word aion by the words " world," " course," " age," " eternal," and in conjunction with the prepositions apo (from), ek (out of), and eis (into), it gives " since the world began," " from the beginning of the world," " for ever," " for evermore," " for ever and ever," " while the earth standeth," " world without end"; while the adjective aionios is rendered " eternal " and " everlasting."

How Can One Word Be Translated So Many Ways?

If we have no theology to uphold, and if we count the judgment of man as a " very small thing," it is possible that we may venture to wonder how it comes about that one word can be translated "since the world began," and also " world without end "; or again, how the word can be rendered " world " (which certainly had a beginning), and at the same time mean "for ever" and "eternal." It has been forced upon us that in all these diverse renderings we have had a good percentage of man's ideas instead of accurate and unflinching translation.

Before Times Eternal?

Our space is too limited to give many examples, but we draw attention to a few. In Matt. xxiv. 3 we read of " the end of the world." This clearly shows that the word aion, translated "world," may have an end. We turn to the very next chapter and find that the word aion, when it becomes an adjective, aionios, is translated by the words " eternal " and " everlasting," words which admittedly allow of no end (Matt. xxv. 46). One thing seems evident, that a true rendering is not found here. Again, there are three important passages where the word aionios is found with the word chronos (time), viz., Rom. xvi. 25; 2 Tim. i. 9, and Titus i. 2. The A.V. translates thus, "since the world began," and " before the world began," while the R.V., going to the other extreme, renders the words, " through times eternal," and " before times eternal." What can we make of a word which can mean a limited period and eternity?

Aion =Age

There is no doubt whatever but that the word aion means " an age," and therefore to interpret it as " for ever " is not a translation, but a human comment, which may be wrong. If the Translators had rendered the word " age-times " instead of " times eternal "; " this age " instead of " this world "; " unto the ages" instead of "for ever," it would have been consistent, and would have allowed each passage to speak for itself, instead of saying just what traditional prejudice would make it say.

The mistranslation of the word aion is but another of the many evidences of man's foolish pride. Man looks forward into the future, or backward into the past. Age upon age stretch away on either side, and seeing no end, and being unable to conceive of one, he calls the space which exceeds his tiny perspective eternity! whereas to Him who sitteth in the heavens it is but one link in the vast chain of the ages wherein He deals
with men, angels, and the universe. We may learn the meaning of the Greek word aion by finding out the Hebrew equivalent.

The Hebrew Equivalent =

The Septuagint Version uses the word aion to translate the Hebrew word olam. Through the careful study of another labourer in the Word we are enabled to give the following list of passages where the Hebrew word olam occurs. First we consider the words me olam, as translated in the A.V.:D

USED OF GOD.

"Ever of old" (Psa. xxv. 6)

"from everlasting" (Psa. xli. 13)

"from everlasting"  (Psa. xc. 2)

"from everlasting"  (Psa. xciii. 2)

"from everlasting"  (Psa. ciii. 17)

"from everlasting" (Isa. lxiii. 16)

USED OF MAN.

"Of old" (Gen. vi. 4)

"In old time"  (Josh. xxiv. 2)

"Of old" (1 Sam. xxvii. 8)

"Of old"  (Psa. cxix. 52)

"long time"  (Isa. xlii. 14)

"Since the beginning of the world"  (Isa. lxiv. 4)

When Applied To God

These are but a few of the passages, but they are enough to help us to see the fitness of the remark that " there is a startling inconsistency here." When applied to God it is always "for ever," or " everlasting," but when applied to man it is never so rendered. Why? Because in no case will the sense bear it. Man and his history do not stretch back to a dateless past eternity. No nation, no prophet has been " from everlasting." If a translator would be guilty of tampering with the prerogatives of God should he render me olam " from everlasting" when referring to the past of man, why should he be labeled a heretic because he questions, equally, the propriety of using the word olam to mean eternity when applied to the future of man ? The case of the past is by the nature of things impossible; the future lies before us, and man has ventured his own opinion, tacked it on to the Word of God, and usurping the solemn authority of that holy Word has swayed the minds, influenced the faith, and stifled the consciences of thousands.

How many have been embittered by that dread whisper "non-eternity" ? How many of God's most faithful witnesses have been hounded down by these modern shibboleth-mongers ?

Let us look at some of the uses of the word olam:

"If the servant shall say .... I will not go out free .... he shall serve him for ever" (Exod. xxi. 5, 6). Of the same class of Hebrew servant we read in Lev. xxv. 40, " He shall serve thee unto the year of jubilee " (when his service ends and he is free to go out not merely alone, but with his wife and children).

Hannah, speaking to Samuel, says, " I will bring him that he may appear before the Lord, and there abide for ever" (1 Sam. i. 22). In verse 11 she interprets these words thus, " I will give him unto the Lord all the days of his life."

There is no room for an " until " in our words " for ever," yet in Isa. xxxii. 14, 15 we read, " The forts and towers shall be for dens for ever .... until the Spirit be poured upon us." Here the for ever has an end, yet if we dare to suggest that it may be so elsewhere, what a shaking of heads and holy indignation we arouse! Scripture never contradicts itself. If our renderings make inconsistencies, let us alter our renderings a thousand times, but let us not tamper with the Scriptures of truth.

Till, To, Unto

Rev. xxi. 22 tells us of a future period when there shall be no temple, yet the A.V. teaches that both the temple, priesthood, and sacrifices were to be for ever (see Ezek. xxxvii. 26; Exod. xl.15, and Numb. xviii. 8). We have not finished yet. The word olam is followed many times by the word va ed. The word ed is rendered " till," "to," "unto," "yet," &c., e.g.:D

"Till thou return unto the ground" (Gen. iii. 19).

"Since that time even until now" (Ezra v. 16, &c.).

Va is the Hebrew equivalent for " and." Thus, if we retain the A.V. rendering, the words le olam va ed would mean " for ever and still," " for ever and yet further " ! That the Hebrew does contain some idea of a period beyond that covered by olam is clear, for the Hebrew Translators of the Septuagint render the words by ton aiona kai ep aiona kai eti (Exod. xv. 18), which literally translated is, "the age, and upon the age, and still"!

Eti

Fifty-one times the A.V. translates eti by the word " yet," besides " further," " any longer," and " still." Surely these facts should make us stop and reconsider this tremendous subject.

There is a further consideration which throws its weight against the idea that aion or olam mean eternity, and that is that aion is frequently found in the plural and the Genitive case. If the singular can mean " for ever," what can the plural mean ? (we cannot speak of " for evers " D- we never shall arrive at the end of eternity, let alone start another). If we keep to the rendering " age " all is clear. We can then have the expressions " unto the age," " unto the ages," and " unto the ages of the ages " without any interference with the divine words, but " eternities of eternities " is absurd.

The root idea of the word olam is something secret or hidden (see Psalm xc. 8, " secret sins "; Eccles. xii. 14, " secret thing "). Because the period is hidden or secret, is undefined or unrevealed, man in his arrogance has jumped to the conclusion that because he cannot see the end, therefore there is none, forgetting that he has limited knowledge and exceedingly limited vision.

Olam and aion signify a period of time whose end is undefined, or which is hidden from man but which is by no means " everlasting," for instances such as the Aaronic priesthood, &c., have been given of such periods coming to an end, which were " for ever " according to the A.V. Added to this we have the twenty passages which speak
of " unto the age of undefined limits and yet further " translated " for ever and ever " by the English, in spite of both Hebrew and Greek.

Let none imagine that the eternal security of the believer is by any means weakened by these facts. This glorious truth is unquestionably settled by such emphatic words as "incorruptible," "immortal," and by the words, "Because I live, ye shall live also," and " Your life is hid with Christ in God".  Let us believe and love the truth, and the truth will make us free; free from the shackles of the traditions of the elders which make void the Word of God, free from the nightmare of Christendom; free from the clogs of error to proclaim "Life to the dead" in the gospel of the glory of Christ.

It is possible that some may be tempted to write to us, and we would anticipate one thing. We have stated facts; we do not hold ourselves responsible for the " words which the Holy Ghost teacheth," neither do we proffer any apology for upsetting anyone's theological beliefs, whatever they may be. We would say in the words of one servant of God to another,

You have your Bible, you have your knees, use them.

[FineLinen]

John R. Gavazzoni -Aion & Aionios-

Please note:

The following is an answer to a brother who asked for input re: an article that claimed that the Christian Universalist position on the meaning of the Greek words, "aion," and "aionios" was in error. The author also tried to make his point be referring to how the Greek words for immortality and incorruption are used in passages of scripture. John offered these thoughts below:

The article contains much crude, clumsy, thinking, brother, and is completely lacking in the spiritual skill of "rightly cutting the word of truth."

First off, there's no way that one can get around a very foundational principle of language, i.e., that the adjective form (in this case, "aionios,") of a noun (in this case, "aion,") can have more force than the noun. The adjective is limited to the scope of the noun.

"Aion" means age; pure and simple.

If we translated "aion" everywhere it's used in the New Testament as eternal or everlasting, it would make nonsense out of many, many passages. An aion has to be understood as an increment of time, and "aionios" most simply put, means pertaining to time, not to eternity.

Measured Pertains To Measure

Let's for a moment, think in terms of material mass, rather than time, and take two words, a noun and its adjective form that are relative to material mass. We're seeking understanding by pointing out a correlation between age and age-pertaining, compared with material mass and what pertains to material mass.

The word, "measure," as in "a measure" of something, is using the word as a noun (though it can be used as a verb). In the case of it being used as a noun in respect to material mass, it cannot be understood to convey infinite material mass. A measure of material mass, would never be understood to mean all the material mass of the universe.

It's a measure of the whole, as in the dictionary definition for "measure" as a noun---"a definite or known quantity measured out," and/or a quantity, degree, or proportion. So, it's adjective form, "measured"," (again, used as an adjective, not a verb), conveys a portion of whatever material mass one is talking about. If something is described as "measured," it pertains to "measure"---a quantity, degree, or proportion.

A measure of something pertains to a portion of whatever material is in question, and is not to be used in the opposite sense of "measureless," or "immeasurable."

Now to the question of how "aionios" is used to describe God.

It is the equivalent of saying, "Emmanuel, God with us."

God, by nature, is eternal, but He is, bless His name, also aionian. He is the transcendent God who is also the imminent God.

He pertains to the created human condition and He abides in the aions with us out from the eternity of His nature.

The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

To speak of God as the aionian God, conveys exactly that.

Aion, or aions, must be understood in relationship to the created (Greek) "kosmos," (the orderly arrangement), and in the relationship of time, space, and materiality, the aions are the unfolding of the the cosmos incrementally, yet with one increment or age flowing into the next, with Christ being the Beginning and the End.

Also, the writer's assertion that the Greek word for "incorruptible," and the Greek word for "immortal" are identical in meaning; obviously they are not. They convey two different conditions, though certainly the conditions are closely related. They are not synonomous.

I won't go into the difference in detail,

I'll simply point out that Christ, in His humanity, was mortal (He had to be, or He couldn't have died for us). He was subject to death in identification with us; BUT, all the while, He was incorruptible.

Think on that.

It is a profound matter that incorruptibility is in fact demonstrated by being subjected to mortality, and mortality cannot intrinsically alter incorruptibility, so that out of incorruptiblility, death is finally conquered.

Whoever wrote that article is spiritually and intellectually adolescent. He's, in a word, out of his league in trying to deal with these subjects. He needs grounding in the fundamentals of the administration of God. I hope this is helpful.