Quote from: eaglesway on June 29, 2016, 08:12:12 AM
Scripture is interpreted by scripture.
As it is important to let the Bible interpret itself, consider the following; the use of aionios/aionion/et.al. (and even AION itself) in the New Testament had a meaning to some NT authors encompassing, or perhaps even mostly intending, that of unending/continual/ongoing/forever-eternal-going-forward etc., something often contested elsewhere on the basis of a false assertion regarding adjectives and their associated nouns; more commentary on that can be found here (http://tentmaker.org/forum/word-studies/considering-timely-recurrence-adjectives-and-aionaioniosaionionetc/).
Luke 1:32-33 with Matt 25:32-46
Rom 2:7
Rom 6:5-23
2 Cor 4:18
1 Tim 6:16
2 Tim 1:10
Phm 1:15
Heb 7 (here it is actually
aion being indicated as forever)
Luke 20:27-37
John 11:26
John 10:28
Some of these do seem to have been mentioned elsewhere but I think not all that I am aware of, so I here mention them all together, hopefully for the benefit of others.
Some of these indications involve multiple passages, but some are actually within the same passage, and thus immediately contextually indicated/validated, rather than just topically related.
Luke 1:32-33 speaks of Jesus kingdom as being ageS withOUT end, while in other passages, notably Matt 25:32-46, that kingdom is spoken of as being aionio-. (Elsewhere someone has disputed this, stating that it does end when it is handed over to the Father, but ignores the fact that the kingdom actually continues, it is merely that the true head of the hierarchy is acknowledged, with the kingdom itself continuing.)
Rom 2:7 contains 'to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and *immortality*(G861 aphtharsia), eternal (aionio-) life', thus indicating that those seeking immortality, that which will not ever be corrupted and may exist in perpetuity(Thayer's), will receive unending/continuous/perpetual (i.e. 'aionios') life, thus indicating the 'henceforth' nature of aionios life, being associated with the state of not being corruptible, in perpetuity.
Consider also Rom 6:5-23, how life that is never to die again, is commensurate with 'aionio-' life...
:4 we too walk in newness of ***life***
:5 if united in likeness of death, shall also be of His ***resurrection**
:8 if have we have died with Christ ... we shall also ***live with Him***
:9 knowing Christ having been raised from the dead is ***never to die again***
:22 ...having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, derive benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, ***eternal life***
:23 ...the free gift of God is ***eternal life*** in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Consider 2 Cor 4:18
...for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are aionios (eternal)
where Paul was making a contrast of the limited with the unlimited, that is aionio- with that which was temporary-temporal. If aionio- was something limited (age-during), then it too would be temporal, and there is really no contrast to be made. If aionio- was not continual/ongoing/unending, as opposed to limited (temporal), what was Paul's point?
Also in 1 Tim 6:16
who alone possesses immortality(G110 athanasia) ... To Him honor and eternal (G166) dominion.
Here we have 'immortality' written of alongside aionio- dominion - since the immortality (not dying, not subject to death) seems to be accepted as unending/ongoing/continual, how could the dominion be any less? Is God to continue living, but not have dominion? That certainly wouldn't seem to be consistent with the idea of God being All in all, something I think is generally understood to truly be ongoing - even as this passage seems to be indicating.
From 2 Tim 1:10 "life and immortality (G861 aphtharsia)"
placing them as commensurate with one another, that 'life' frequently elsewhere being referred to by Paul and others as aionian life.
Note too that this passage indicates that it was Jesus who brought an awareness of such 'to light', where it could be seen, and recall Moses admonition that Jesus was to be listened to, regarding those who state that such concepts were not present in the OT (although they do seem to appear there at least in David's compositions, Psa 16:10, 49:9.)
While the two words translated as immortality in those two verses are different greek words, Paul brings them together in 1 Cor 15:53.
From Phm 1:15,
For perhaps he was for this reason separated from you for a while, that you would have him back forever, G166
Paul's point here is seemingly another contrast, being that Philemon lost his servant for a while in this life, but would have him back indefinitely ('forever') now and in the next life as a brother (as he apparently accepted Christ). If aionio- did not mean unending/ongoing/continually, what was Paul's point? Was Paul saying, 'oh yeah, you didn't have him for some limited period of time, in order that you could have him for some limited period of time'? Seems unlikely.
From Heb 7 Melchizedek, perpetual, eternal
:3 having ***neither beginning of days***, ***nor end of life***, he remains (G3306) a priest ***perpetually*** (G1519 [G3588 HCSB] G1336)
:8 ...of whom it is witnessed that ***he lives on*** (or YLT, 'was living' vs those 'who die').
:16 ...according to the power of an ***indestructible/endless/indissoluble (G179) life***
:21 ... you are a priest ***FOREVER (G165)***...
:24 ... Jesus...continues Forever (G165), holds His priesthood permanently/unalterably/invioably(G531).
:25 ... able to save forever(completely G1519 G3838) those who draw near to God through Him, since He always(G3842) lives...
:28 ... a son, made perfect(G5048) forever(G165).
Another passage, where the notion of 'nor end of life', 'perpetually'/continually, being equated with 'priest FOREVER (aion), continues FOREVER (aion) and made perfect FOREVER (aion). So here even the use of AION, not just AIONIO-S/-N is equated to being unending/continual/ongoing.
And several passages related to 'life', and its unending/ongoing/continuance... life which elsewhere is referred to as aionios/etc life.
Luke 20:27-37 (resurrection - never die anymore)
:36 ...cannot even die anymore...
John 11:26
:25 ...will live even if he dies...
:26 and everyone who lives and believes in Me ***will never die***.
and John 10:28
[ABP] "And I G2222 [4life G166 3eternal G1325 1give G1473 2to them], G2532 and G3766.2 in no way G622 shall they perish G1519 into G3588 the G165 eon"
which I realize some here will dispute because of the 'into the eon', not acknowledging it may be a final, infinitely continuing, eon, perhaps the same as the eon spoken of regarding Melchizedek and Christ as priests in Heb 7, where (already mentioned above) other words in that passage indicate the intent of indefiniteness/ongoing/unending/continuance.
Statements have been made (a)here (http://www.what-the-hell-is-hell.com/HellEncyclopedia/eternal.htm) that "an adjective CANNOT take on a greater force than its noun form", (b)here (http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/Matthew-25-46-Commentary-Amirault.html) that "An adjective CANNOT have a greater meaning than the noun from which it is derived.", and (c)here (http://www.tentmaker.org/articles/EternalPunishment-IsitReallyofGod.html) that "The meaning of the adjective form of a word depends upon and corresponds to the meaning of the noun from which it is derived. As an example, a daily (adjective) paper comes every day (noun) not monthly or hourly.".
If one sufficiently considers timeLY adjectives (and some others as well) and their usage, one should realize that events indicated/modified by the use of these adjectives are not limited in any absolute terms, but rather that a continual/ongoing recurrence/repetition is indicated by their use, and is merely measured/countable in incremental intervals identified by the unit of time of the associated noun, not at all limited by the noun to any oneness of occurrence.
As a specific example, consider the last quote from (c) above, as it highlights the falseness of the basic assertions, that the adjective is limited by the noun. The general thought ('a daily paper comes every day') is even noted, but its import seems completely overlooked.
A 'daily paper' continues without end, on recurring intervals of a day. The event is not limited to an occurrence of one day, but to the interval of recurrence/repetition is indicated as one day.
Further, consider an 'hourly chime', which while occurring on the hour of the clock, is not limited to a single hour, but will repeatedly occur on each/every hour of the clock.
Or a 'daily', 'monthly', or 'yearly' schedule, each of which would be expected to repeat on the indicated intervals.
Or an hourly wage, which is understood as wages to be paid for each hour worked, not just one of the hours worked; it is a repeating wage, for continued work.
Each of those articles, and others with similar material, attempt to use this assertion of an adjective being limited to its corresponding noun which as presented is falsely stated, to indicate aionios etc. could not have meant anything larger than a single, ending, age.
When one truthfully acknowledges that the use of such adjectives is indicating something greater than the corresponding nouns alone, i.e. is indicating a continual/repetitive occurrence, one can easily envision that in the greek, such a situation may well have also been the norm.
And thus, aionios/etc may well have meant something greater than an individual age.
Reviewing various NT passages where the term is used in addition to other words indicating perpetuity/endlessness, this can be seen as the actual intent of some NT authors:
Luke 1:32-33 with Matt 45:32-46
Rom 2:7
Rom 6:5-23
2 Cor 4:18
1 Tim 6:16
Phm 1:15
Heb 7 (which actually indicates aion, not just the aionio- adjective, as being continual/endless)
Eventually (to be edited in), see here (http://tentmaker.org/forum/word-studies/nt-evidence-aionaioniosaionionetc-used-as-unendingongoingetc/) for some commentary on these specific NT passages.
Yes, but "in Him alone, is immortality"... Even in the kingdom to come, we will have perpetual, daily, present, life in Him.. From Ps 2 "this is the decree.. my Son.."
? :gsmile:
Even a daily paper can be ceased..
If (imo) we let the Word decipher - "in Him alone is immortality"
We may, at His return be clothed with immortality, but that immortality will be the fullness of Jesus. To think any creature will be able to be immortal at any time apart from Him , and beyond the Father's ability to discontinue.. I suppose contributes to that so insulting doctrine.. as evidently He is seen as powerless to do anything about those who are not reconciled to Him during this brief lifetime.
Whereas His Word says "with God all things are possible"
Perpetual... we will have perpetual ongoing life but immortality is in Him alone, who iS life. We are still created, and the source of life is not in us.. or it is in some limited fashion.. as able to bless, but far inferior to Him and His purposes, substance, etc.
As in He alone is the" perpetual and ongoing life.. "He alone is immortal".
(Isn't that the whoLe lesson of life/this life? That there's only two directions, toward Him or away from Him. And away from Him can only, ever, result in death/non-life.
This life being apocalypse.. in that the crashing and burning (I.e. failure, both individual and collective) is the unveiling of true from not true. This life being via His decree, and working out, is apocalypse (death, failing, fading, entropy). Teaching all inheaven and earth that one cannot ever 'live' apart from Him (who iS life).
:Peace2: :dsunny:
Punishment- I.e. correction.. perpetual and ongoing.. until it's over.. :gsmile:
Which, of course such an application cannot be applied to Him, who alone is immortal.. Even His kingdom, being an extension of Him, is still dependent upon the life, which is Him.
This a repost from two things I posted today, which I try to avoid, but they fit this and I dont want to rewrite them.
As far as aion is concerned, the root of aion in the NT is "olam" in the OT.
"Olam" is used over 450 times in the OT.
Repost 1 from thread "Common Jewish Idiomatic ...."
While it is debatable as to what the common Israelite spoke, some say aramaic, a shrinking number say greek, some Syriac- maybe a mix, but we can(imo) be fairly sure those who were active in their faith were familiar with the Hebrew scriptures and I believe they used Hebrew in services and in the temple, and probably in mid-rash(discussion and debate).
I look to idiomatic expression for confirmation, and in "olam" we have those.
olam is still used today, and it is the word that aion/aionios is connected to in the transition from Hebrew to Greek.
Theologically, imo, aion and olam are the same, or are meant to be the same by the one who gave all the scriptures- the Holy Spirit.
Today, you can Google olam, and among Jews there are idiomatic expressions that are still used and familiar.
"Olam ha-ba" which is the "age/world(aion) to come"...connected to thoughts about the life in paradise or heaven for the resurrection of the righteous.
"Olam ha-ze" is "This present evil age/world(aion)" and I personally feel that if those definitions have remained over all these thousands of years we can trust that they are accurate and consistent with the use of "olam" in the NT. I have examined every one of the 454 occurrences of olam in the OT and I do think the modern usages are totally consistent, idiomatically, theologically and in the spirit- but that is just my opinion.
"Tikkun olam" means "repairing the world"... in brief we move from "olam ha-ze" to "olam ha-ba" though our engagement in "tikkun olam"- and this is exactly what Peter proclaimed on the day of pentecost if you look at Acts 2 and 3
He exhorted all to repent, and be baptized toward the forgiveness of their sins and to receive the promise of the Spirit as "times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord whom the heavens must receive until the period of the restoration of all things...."
If you think about it Jesus proclaimed the same thing, offering, "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" so that we are bringing the "kingdom of God" within us into this "present evil age" as lights shining in a dark place until Messiah returns and the age to come begins in earnest.
Also Paul, in Romans 8:
I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. 19For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 20For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.
22We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. 24For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? 25But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.
We groan in "olam ha-ze" to be free in "olam ha-ba" as as fellowworkers with Christ we are engaged in "tikkun olam".
The theme in all these concepts is consistent, so to be unaware of that consistency- in the transition from OT to New, is at least, imo, a significant veil to the scriptures, and a good reason for keeping a topic like "Using Common Jewish Idiomatic Language" -alive
Repost 2
And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with Him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages(aionion) He might display the surpassing riches of His grace, demonstrated by His kindness to us in Christ Jesus.
Our work has ages to come, in restoring the world through the Kingdom of God in Christ.
We are not here just to "get saved from hell" and sit in some kind of Christian Nirvana singing praise songs in eternal gooey bliss while the rest of the people from all the ages past scream bloody murder and curse God from the lake of fire.
To me that whole cosmology is mythical, unintelligent, philosophically reprehensible and theologically incorrect.
The "world" of this "age" is going to be swallowed up by the "world" of the "age" to come, untill God is ALL IN ALL(1 Cor 15 23-28
In all wisdom and insight 9 He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him 10 with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. In Him 11 also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, 12 to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. Eph 1
I very much like reading these, as I don't remember about the Old Testament olam very long.. I didn't mean to say I thought Jesus spoke Greek.. .. maybe some New Testament letters were written in Greek, I think if written to Greeks but I don't really know, but would assume Jesus and the people spoke Aramaic.. I've just always thought of the Gehenna verses Jesus spoke as having very dramatic flair, and was the only idiom I could think of.. Now that I think about it, the Hebrew is and was most likely every bit as given to dramatic as the Greek.
I think Jesus spoke Aramaic also, because of the translation to hades.. I just can't see Jesus using the word hades and see it as problematic.. though the word/idea was and is allowed, even ordained? by God, for His own reason(s).
:gsmile:
I agree marie, I cant see Jesus using Hades, being aware, as He surely was, of the mythical and cultural meanings of that word to Greeks. It is NOT the same meaning as "sheol" and I think He used the proper name all Jews identified with, "Sheol". That's one reason why I think He spoke Aramaic and maybe Hebrew when speaking to the Sanhedrin and read Hebrew from the scriptures in the temple.... I mean, that is just what makes sense to me, I dont present that as conclusive- but I think the jewish tendency to use idiomatic language through-out the ages concerning certain major themes, like the names of Gd and as I already demonstarated with "olam", gives us encouragement to postulate that the Jews NEVER to this day lost familiarity with their native language in relationship to the scriptures.
This is why I always say we have to understad the Hebrew mindset, coming out of the OT in the original language, is an IMMENSE resource in gaining the mind of Christ regarding debatable issues :thumbsup: :Peace2:
For anyone who wants to look at the relationship between "Sheol(hebrew), Hades(Greek), Inferno(latin) and Hell(Norse/English) and the etymology and morphology of those words...
http://hell-is-a-myth.webs.com/hellisamyth.htm (http://hell-is-a-myth.webs.com/hellisamyth.htm)
and at "olam"
http://hell-is-a-myth.webs.com/olamaionforever.htm (http://hell-is-a-myth.webs.com/olamaionforever.htm)
This post needs to be incorporated in the other post of nearly the same content. But I am not sure how to do that so I will wait and ask James. :o)
Amen..! Especially about the Hebrew mindset in so very many of these issues (studies). Like an anchor! Or a sword piercing through the confusion of pagan belief and myth.
Amen! This article is VERY helpful! As to this whole topic.. EW posted - http://hell-is-a-myth.webs.com/olamaionforever.htm
Quote from: eaglesway on October 31, 2016, 09:17:07 PM
This post needs to be incorporated in the other post of nearly the same content. But I am not sure how to do that so I will wait and ask James. :o)
You can do it!! (but I did ;) )
Quote from: eaglesway on October 31, 2016, 09:17:07 PM
This post needs to be incorporated in the other post of nearly the same content.
The two posts should _not_ have been combined in the same thread.
The focus of the two posts was entirely different with significantly different content.
If you read them carefully I think you will see that they are not "nearly the same content."
There was only a very small overlap between the two.
One focused very specifically on a false assertion made about adjectives and their associated nouns.
The other focused very specifically on NT usage of aionios etc. in multiple passages with other words that (also) indicate unending/continuance regarding the same or time-related 'items', providing evidence that aionios etc. apparently were used to indicate unending/continuance/perpetuity/etc by at least Paul and Luke (and similar for aion by author of Hebrews.)
Quote from: jabcat on November 01, 2016, 12:55:17 AM
Quote from: eaglesway on October 31, 2016, 09:17:07 PM
This post needs to be incorporated in the other post of nearly the same content. But I am not sure how to do that so I will wait and ask James. :o)
You can do it!! (but I did ;) )
Did you carefully read them yourself and concur that they were of "nearly the same content"?
Because the two posts were very different in focus and most content.
Please review them, and consider returning the post regarding the common and false adjective/noun assertion to its own separate thread again where it belonged.
Thanks.
Quote from: marie glen on October 31, 2016, 04:09:55 PM
Even a daily paper can be ceased..
Yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with the 'daily' part of it does it.
The intent of the phrase, and I expect the vendors desire as long as they're profiting, is that of continuance.
The NewTestament indications from the presented passages ('other' post) is that aionion etc. usage is an indication of unending/continuance/perpetuity/etc., as evidenced by the Bible itself; not limited/finite as some assert, a) falsely presenting certain word relationships that do not exist as presented without exception, as evidenced by their own example ('daily paper' etc.), and b)using non-biblical sources, when the Bible itself provides evidence to the contrary as to its meaning in NT usage.
Quote from: ps on November 02, 2016, 05:41:58 AM
Quote from: jabcat on November 01, 2016, 12:55:17 AM
Quote from: eaglesway on October 31, 2016, 09:17:07 PM
This post needs to be incorporated in the other post of nearly the same content. But I am not sure how to do that so I will wait and ask James. :o)
You can do it!! (but I did ;) )
Did you carefully read them yourself and concur that they were of "nearly the same content"?
Because the two posts were very different in focus and most content.
Please review them, and consider returning the post regarding the common and false adjective/noun assertion to its own separate thread again where it belonged....., and The two posts should _not_ have been combined in the same thread.
Thanks.
This needs to be discussed by PM, not in public view. Thanks.
http://tentmaker.org/forum/rules-and-faq/**how-to-post-your-first-post**-and-a-mandatory-first-read/msg27185/#msg27185
***FORUM GUIDELINES and First Post***
Read in entirety prior to making first post. (may be amended periodically)
TM is not a "general debate forum", but a closely moderated discussion board focused on Universal or Ultimate Restoration. Certain things are expected for someone to post. Read the following forum expectations, and making ones' first post indicates an agreement to abide by those guidelines. Questions and discussion is encouraged, but within the forum guidelines outlined below.
All discussion is within limits that have to be assessed by the moderators, including whether what's being discussed is just "preaching/teaching" things considered a clear contradiction to BASIC scriptural/spiritual truths (as understood by the ministry and noted in the Guidelines) and stubbornly continuing to do so past a point of it not being considered fruitful/"useful" to this specific forum's focus. Having been informed of such, either in a thread or by PM, moderation may occur, up to and including requests, warnings, deletion of posts, and banning.
Please remember to post "as I understand, in my opinion (IMO), as I see it, I believe, etc." - if not expressly stated, then obviously in that spirit/attitude. TM Discussion Forum is not any one person's teaching platform. It's a DISCUSSION forum, specifically focused on UR.
TM Beliefs Regarding Universal Restoration - adapted from Gary Amirault
We believe that all men (and women) will eventually be saved ONLY because of the finished work of Jesus Christ on the Cross as He draws each one and gives them faith to believe on Jesus as Savior, not because of any other way. We do NOT believe all religions lead to heaven. The way into Heaven is through Jesus Christ alone. We have nothing to do with the various forms of the New Age Movement. This is NOT the universalism of Tentmaker Ministries, or true Christian universalism. There is only one Name under heaven by which one must be saved as far as Gary Amirault and Tentmaker Ministries goes -- that name is Jesus the Christ (English), Yeshua Ha Machiach (Hebrew), Iesus Christos (Greek). There are no "ascended masters" as far as we are concerned.
We do NOT believe all mankind is presently saved. We do not believe members of other religions are saved at this time. If God wanted to save the entire planet today, He easily could. But He has a plan, wherein salvation is extended to people in an order, and that order extends beyond our present age. We also believe in evangelism. People come to Christ through the gospel, through preaching the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We believe in Holiness, not necessarily the Holiness Pentecostal form of heavy legalism, but we believe God holds us accountable to living a moral and orderly life. Honest questions and discussion regarding these TM beliefs, even if one is of a different persuasion, is welcomed. However, just arguing, stirring strife, and continuing to teach/proclaim to the contrary after having been requested by a moderator to change directions (based on posting guidelines in the first paragraph above) will be moderated accordingly as also outlined above. Basically, please honor any request made by a moderator. Such decisions are not made without reason and consideration.
The Scriptures
Tentmaker is a Biblical, Christian, Victorious Gospel of Jesus Christ, Ultimate Reconciliation Site and Discussion Forum. We recognize there are translational issues, as well as many different viewpoints, levels of understanding, and varying degrees of levels of Spirit-revelation within the scriptures. There is MUCH room given for discussion, within forum guidelines. However, our focus is WITHIN THE SCRIPTURES. Gary Amirault has noted that there needs to be a respect for scripture in the discussion forum. Accurately translated (as much as is currently possible) and revealed by the Spirit, they are reliable.
Outright texual criticism is not an allowed topic or matter of discussion on the TM discussion forum.
...legitimate questions and discussions are welcome, but anything strictly considered as just stirring strife, or otherwise against forum guidelines, will be moderated accordingly.
Various Specifics
If a moderation has taken place that you believe is wrong, use Private Messaging to discuss the issue.
You may not challenge moderation decisions in a public thread.For these one warning may be given and then if repeated, you may be banned without further explanation. The ban may be of time duration but rather expect it to be permanent.
1. Trolling.
2. Baiting.
3. Flaming.
4. Calling out any member's views/opinions as stupid, dumb, crazy etc., i.e. insults.
5. Public criticism of moderation.
6. Starting a new thread of a similar topic as one that is recently locked.
7. Outright "trashing" of the scriptures - "they are untrue", "X writer of scripture was an imposter, not inspired", etc. (Obviously there are translational issues).
8. Stirring strife/creating dissension, as determined by moderators.
If you agree to respect these guidelines, enjoy your time at TM Discussion Forum.
Sorry folks... was offline and working out of town yesterday. I detrmined after reading the two threads and looking at the titles that they needed to be combined. James was kind enough to do it for me because I havent learned how to do that yet- so I know James agreed with my estimation.
I stand behind that evaluation- the threads are combined. So be it.
Now, to the post, itself.
You have made the distinction that aionios always refers to the eternal, even tho the word itself does not mean that, so, you ignore that aion means "age"- without disputation by anyone in the known universe.
Then you insist that aionios means "eternal" except when it is convenient for you to categorize it as "temporal"- like these meanings can just be transmutable to one's own particulr purpose.
But Paul speaks of "the ages to come" in Eph 2:7, and these are not eternities, they are "ages", periods of time with an end and a beginning.
For example, in the New International Version, Eph 3:21 is
to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen.
In the Jubilee Bible it is,
unto him be glory in the congregation {Gr. ekklesia – called out ones} by Christ Jesus throughout all generations of the ages of the ages. Amen.
In Young's Literal it is
to Him is the glory in the assembly in Christ Jesus, to all the generations of the age of the ages. Amen.
If these were eternities of eternities there would be no generations. Paul is talking about time, as He was in Ephesians 1:9-11
A dispensation(plan) suitable to the fulness of times, the gathering together of all things into one in Christ, whether things in the heavens or the earth.
So you refute both the actual meaning of "aion" and the contextual usage of the word.
All because it suits your view to rely on "poetic translations" rather that LOOK AT THE WORDS IN CONTEXT.
:iagree: :thumbsup:
:thumbsup: :iagree:
Posted by PM
"Consider 2 Cor 4:18
...for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are aionios (eternal)
where Paul was making a contrast of the limited with the unlimited, that is aionio- with that which was temporary-temporal. If aionio- was something limited (age-during), then it too would be temporal, and there is really no contrast to be made. If aionio- was not continual/ongoing/unending, as opposed to limited (temporal), what was Paul's point?"
Maybe I just didn't understand the replies in this thread but did anyone actually refute this or does somebody want to give it a shot.
Thanks
The infinity of God is that perfection of God by which He is free from all limitations.Much more than anyone can even begin to fathom in the human heart , But the Holy Spirit gives us confidence in Gods grace .
AS ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE WITH GOD .
Quote from: Andrew on March 17, 2018, 01:54:33 AM
Posted by PM
"Consider 2 Cor 4:18
...for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are aionios (eternal)
where Paul was making a contrast of the limited with the unlimited, that is aionio- with that which was temporary-temporal. If aionio- was something limited (age-during), then it too would be temporal, and there is really no contrast to be made. If aionio- was not continual/ongoing/unending, as opposed to limited (temporal), what was Paul's point?"
Maybe I just didn't understand the replies in this thread but did anyone actually refute this or does somebody want to give it a shot.
Thanks
In the context of Paul's describing is things seen and unseen to the human eye ... for me :2c:
15 All this is for your sake so that, as God's kindness overflows in the lives of many people, it will produce even more thanksgiving to the glory of God. 16 That is why we are not discouraged. Though outwardly we are wearing out, inwardly we are renewed day by day. 17
Our suffering is light and temporary and is producing for us an eternal glory that is greater than anything we can imagine. 18 We don't look for things that can be seen but for things that can't be seen. Things that can be seen are only temporary. But
things that can't be seen last forever.WE do not see God but know He is and cannot see His works from the beginning to end , but we do believe they will be perfect and entire without lack in anything .
When everything is being made new , will GOD be all in all or not ?
1Cor 15 20 But now, Christ has been raised from the dead— the firstfruit of the ones having fallen-asleep.
21 For since death came through a man, the resurrection of dead ones also came through a man.
22 For just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be given-life,
23 but each in his own order: Christ the firstfruit; after-that the ones of Christ at His coming.
24 Then comes the end— when He hands-over the kingdom to His God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power.
25 For He must reign until which time He has put all the enemies under His feet.
26 Death, the last enemy, is abolished—
27 for "He subjected all things under His feet" [Ps 8:6]. But when He says that "All things have been subjected", it is clear that this is except the One having subjected all things to Him.
28 But when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One having subjected all things to Him, in order that God may be all things in all.
I cannot limit Gods glory nor His authority over saving the world or taking away the sins of the whole world
I don't see any reason to doubt Gods salvation of all , at all :2c:
Thanks Marie Glen for your reply but doesn't that prove PM's point that aionios means eternal. Am I missing something? Someone please help
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.
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:
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
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.
Quote from: Andrew on March 19, 2018, 06:49:43 PM
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.
Quote from: GodIsLove on March 19, 2018, 09:21:05 PM
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".
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.
Quote from: JamesH on March 17, 2018, 07:31:08 PM
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'.
Quote from: darryl on March 20, 2018, 12:13:25 AM
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:
Quote from: GodIsLove on March 20, 2018, 12:34:36 AM
Quote from: darryl on March 20, 2018, 12:13:25 AM
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.
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.
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.")
Quote from: darryl on March 20, 2018, 02:32:43 AM
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.
Quote from: trettep on March 20, 2018, 04:38:17 AM
Quote from: darryl on March 20, 2018, 02:32:43 AM
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
Thanks for those replies guys. Those were some great posts and dialogue. I think I'll sleep better tonight.
Quote from: darryl on March 20, 2018, 04:51:06 AM
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).
Quote from: jabcat on March 20, 2018, 08:46:06 AM
Quote from: darryl on March 20, 2018, 04:51:06 AM
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: