BRXII Battle talk
- Thread starter Poly
- Start date
- Status
Jason,
I was assuming you had been involved in these ongoing discussions for awhile and were well aware of the evidence regarding aionion not having to mean forever.
I am not going over everything here. You sound very intelligent and able to do your own research.
You can begin by going to Google and typing in “aionion classical greek literature”
Before going to textual sources outside of the Bible we can start with the Septuagint.
"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," Num. 25:13. The land of Canaan is given as an "everlasting" possession, and "for ever," Gen. 17:8, and 13:15. In Deut. 23:3, "for ever" is distinctly made an equivalent to "even to the tenth generation." In Lam. 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 Num. 18:19, the heave offerings of the holy things are a covenant "for ever." CALEB obtains his inheritance "for ever," Josh. 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 Isaiah 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. -- Ez. 16:55." Christ Triumphant by Thomas Allin
I have verified these verses for myself in the Septuagint.
Respected evangelical Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible and Rotherham's The Emphasized Bible do use 'age' or 'age-abiding' instead of 'forever.'
Just a cursory read through Bauer , Gingrich and Danker Lexicon reveals apparent inconsistencies and bias, based on their theological mindset.
No. That is their interpretation of their research. Translators and lexographers are not gods. They are not unbiased. They are in a since just like medical doctors. They learn within a paradigm. The read one thing and see another.
"Herodian, who wrote in Greek about the end of the second century A.D., called these aionios, "eonian," games. In no sense could those games have been eternal.
Adolph Deissman gives this account: "Upon a lead tablet found in the Necropolis at Adrumetum in the Roman province of Africa, near Carthage, the following inscription, belonging to the early third century, is scratched in Greek: 'I am adjuring Thee, the great God, the eonian, and more than eonian (epaionion) and almighty...' If by eonian, endless time were meant, then what could be more than endless time?"
In the Apostolical Constitutions, a work of the fourth century A.D., it is said, kai touto humin esto nomimon aionion hos tes suntleias to aionos, "And let this be to you an eonian ordinance until the consummation of the eon." Obviously there was no thought in the author's mind of endless time.
Dr. Agar Beet, in his article "On the Future Punishment of Sin," published in The Expositor, carefully examined the meaning of the word aionios, and the only passage in which Dr. Beet could adduce the word could possibly mean endless was from Plato's Laws (p. 904 A). But there is a question there as to whether Plato was referring to endless time.
The noun and adjective we are studying were used repeatedly in the Septuagint in relation to ordinances and laws which were limited as to time. A check of these usages as given in a concordance to the Septuagint will show there is no instance in which these words can refer to endlessness.
Dr. Mangey, a translator of the writings of Philo, says Philo did not use aionios to express endless duration.
Josephus shows that aionios did not mean endlessness, for he uses it of the period between the giving of the law to Moses and that of his own writing; to the period of the imprisonment of the tyrant John by the Romans; and to the period during which Herod's temple stood. The temple had already been destroyed by the time Josephus was writing.
St. Gregory of Nyssa speaks of aionios diastêma, "an eonian interval." It would be absurd to call an interval "endless."
St. Chrysostum, in his homily on Eph. 2:1-3, says that "Satan's kingdom is æonian; that is, it will cease with the present world."
St. Justin Martyr repeatedly used the word aionios as in the Apol. (p. 57), aionion kolasin ...all ouchi chiliontaetê periodon, "eonian chastening ...but a period, not a thousand years." Or, as some translate the last clause: "but a period of a thousand years only." He limits the eonian chastening to a period of a thousand years, rather than to endlessness.
In 1 Enoch 10:10 there is an interesting statement using the Greek words: zoên aionion, "life eonian," or, as in the KJV, "everlasting life" (at John 3:16 and elswhere). The whole sentence in Enoch is, hoti elpizousi zêsai zoên aionion, kai hoti zêsetai hekastos auton etê pentakosia, "For they hope to live an eonian life, and that each one of them will live five hundred years." Here, eonian life is limited to five hundred years! In the N.T. eonian life is limited to life during the eons, after which death will be destroyed by making ALL alive IN CHRIST, incorruptible and immortal."
An Analytical Study of Words by Louis Abbott
To Be Continued...
I was assuming you had been involved in these ongoing discussions for awhile and were well aware of the evidence regarding aionion not having to mean forever.
I am not going over everything here. You sound very intelligent and able to do your own research.
You can begin by going to Google and typing in “aionion classical greek literature”
Before going to textual sources outside of the Bible we can start with the Septuagint.
"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," Num. 25:13. The land of Canaan is given as an "everlasting" possession, and "for ever," Gen. 17:8, and 13:15. In Deut. 23:3, "for ever" is distinctly made an equivalent to "even to the tenth generation." In Lam. 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 Num. 18:19, the heave offerings of the holy things are a covenant "for ever." CALEB obtains his inheritance "for ever," Josh. 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 Isaiah 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. -- Ez. 16:55." Christ Triumphant by Thomas Allin
I have verified these verses for myself in the Septuagint.
Respected evangelical Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible and Rotherham's The Emphasized Bible do use 'age' or 'age-abiding' instead of 'forever.'
Just a cursory read through Bauer , Gingrich and Danker Lexicon reveals apparent inconsistencies and bias, based on their theological mindset.
No. That is their interpretation of their research. Translators and lexographers are not gods. They are not unbiased. They are in a since just like medical doctors. They learn within a paradigm. The read one thing and see another.
"Herodian, who wrote in Greek about the end of the second century A.D., called these aionios, "eonian," games. In no sense could those games have been eternal.
Adolph Deissman gives this account: "Upon a lead tablet found in the Necropolis at Adrumetum in the Roman province of Africa, near Carthage, the following inscription, belonging to the early third century, is scratched in Greek: 'I am adjuring Thee, the great God, the eonian, and more than eonian (epaionion) and almighty...' If by eonian, endless time were meant, then what could be more than endless time?"
In the Apostolical Constitutions, a work of the fourth century A.D., it is said, kai touto humin esto nomimon aionion hos tes suntleias to aionos, "And let this be to you an eonian ordinance until the consummation of the eon." Obviously there was no thought in the author's mind of endless time.
Dr. Agar Beet, in his article "On the Future Punishment of Sin," published in The Expositor, carefully examined the meaning of the word aionios, and the only passage in which Dr. Beet could adduce the word could possibly mean endless was from Plato's Laws (p. 904 A). But there is a question there as to whether Plato was referring to endless time.
The noun and adjective we are studying were used repeatedly in the Septuagint in relation to ordinances and laws which were limited as to time. A check of these usages as given in a concordance to the Septuagint will show there is no instance in which these words can refer to endlessness.
Dr. Mangey, a translator of the writings of Philo, says Philo did not use aionios to express endless duration.
Josephus shows that aionios did not mean endlessness, for he uses it of the period between the giving of the law to Moses and that of his own writing; to the period of the imprisonment of the tyrant John by the Romans; and to the period during which Herod's temple stood. The temple had already been destroyed by the time Josephus was writing.
St. Gregory of Nyssa speaks of aionios diastêma, "an eonian interval." It would be absurd to call an interval "endless."
St. Chrysostum, in his homily on Eph. 2:1-3, says that "Satan's kingdom is æonian; that is, it will cease with the present world."
St. Justin Martyr repeatedly used the word aionios as in the Apol. (p. 57), aionion kolasin ...all ouchi chiliontaetê periodon, "eonian chastening ...but a period, not a thousand years." Or, as some translate the last clause: "but a period of a thousand years only." He limits the eonian chastening to a period of a thousand years, rather than to endlessness.
In 1 Enoch 10:10 there is an interesting statement using the Greek words: zoên aionion, "life eonian," or, as in the KJV, "everlasting life" (at John 3:16 and elswhere). The whole sentence in Enoch is, hoti elpizousi zêsai zoên aionion, kai hoti zêsetai hekastos auton etê pentakosia, "For they hope to live an eonian life, and that each one of them will live five hundred years." Here, eonian life is limited to five hundred years! In the N.T. eonian life is limited to life during the eons, after which death will be destroyed by making ALL alive IN CHRIST, incorruptible and immortal."
An Analytical Study of Words by Louis Abbott
To Be Continued...
Jason,
"Aiónios is found in none of the ancient classics above quoted. ( IIliad and Odyssey Homeric Hymn of Mercury, Hesiod, Aristotle, Hippocrates, Empedocles, Euripides, Philoctetes.)
Finding it (aionios) in Plato, Mr. Goodwin thinks that Plato coined it, and it had not come into general use, for even Socrates, the teacher of Plato, does not use it. Aidios is the classic word for endless duration.
Plato uses aión eight times, aiónios five, diaiónios once, and makraión twice. Of course if he regarded aión as meaning eternity he would not prefix the word meaning long, to add duration to it.
In all the above authors extending more than six hundred years, the word is never found. Of course it must mean the same as the noun that is its source. It having clearly appeared that the noun is uniformly used to denote limited duration, and never to signify eternity, it is equally apparent that the adjective must mean the same. The noun sweetness gives its flavor to its adjective, sweet. The adjective long means precisely the same as the noun length. When sweet stands for acidity, and long represents brevity, aiónios can properly mean eternal, derived from aión, which represents limited duration. To say that Plato, the inventor of the word, has used the adjective to mean eternal, when neither he nor any of his predecessors ever used the noun to denote eternity, would be to charge one of the wisest of men with etymological stupidity. Has he been guilty of such folly? How does he use the word?
PLATO'S USAGE.
1. He employs the noun as his predecessors did. I give an illustration*- "Leading a life (aióna) involved in troubles."
2. The Adjective.(30) Referring to certain souls in Hades, he describes them as in aiónion intoxication. But that he does not use the word in the sense of endless is evident from the Phædon, where he says, "It is a very ancient opinion that souls quitting this world, repair to the infernal regions, and return after that, to live in this world." After the aiónion intoxication is over, they return to earth, which demonstrates that the world was not used by him as meaning endless. Again,(31) he speaks of that which is indestructible, (anolethron) and not aiónion. He places the two words in contrast, whereas, had he intended to use aiónion as meaning endless, he would have said indestructible and aiónion.
Once more,(32) Plato quotes four instances of aión, and three of aiónios, and one ofdiaiónios in a single passage, in contrast with aidios (eternal.) The gods he calls eternal, (aidios) but the soul and the corporeal nature, he says, are aiónios, belonging to time, and "all these," he says, "are part of time." And he calls Time [Kronos] an aiónios image of Aiónos. Exactly what so obscure an author may mean here is not apparent, but one thing is perfectly clear, he cannot mean eternity and eternal by aiónios and aiónion, for nothing is wider from the fact than that fluctuating, changing Time, beginning and ending, and full of mutations, is an image of Eternity. It is in every possible particular its exact opposite.
THE GREEK WORD AIÓN -- AIÓNIOS, TRANSLATED Everlasting – Eternal IN THE HOLY BIBLE, SHOWN TO DENOTE LIMITED DURATION. BY REV. JOHN WESLEY HANSON, A.M.
This is just the beginning of evidence that could be provided.
At the very least you would have to admit, there is reasonable evidence that “aionios” can mean limited duration.
If you don’t, then I go back to my original quote:
"Aiónios is found in none of the ancient classics above quoted. ( IIliad and Odyssey Homeric Hymn of Mercury, Hesiod, Aristotle, Hippocrates, Empedocles, Euripides, Philoctetes.)
Finding it (aionios) in Plato, Mr. Goodwin thinks that Plato coined it, and it had not come into general use, for even Socrates, the teacher of Plato, does not use it. Aidios is the classic word for endless duration.
Plato uses aión eight times, aiónios five, diaiónios once, and makraión twice. Of course if he regarded aión as meaning eternity he would not prefix the word meaning long, to add duration to it.
In all the above authors extending more than six hundred years, the word is never found. Of course it must mean the same as the noun that is its source. It having clearly appeared that the noun is uniformly used to denote limited duration, and never to signify eternity, it is equally apparent that the adjective must mean the same. The noun sweetness gives its flavor to its adjective, sweet. The adjective long means precisely the same as the noun length. When sweet stands for acidity, and long represents brevity, aiónios can properly mean eternal, derived from aión, which represents limited duration. To say that Plato, the inventor of the word, has used the adjective to mean eternal, when neither he nor any of his predecessors ever used the noun to denote eternity, would be to charge one of the wisest of men with etymological stupidity. Has he been guilty of such folly? How does he use the word?
PLATO'S USAGE.
1. He employs the noun as his predecessors did. I give an illustration*- "Leading a life (aióna) involved in troubles."
2. The Adjective.(30) Referring to certain souls in Hades, he describes them as in aiónion intoxication. But that he does not use the word in the sense of endless is evident from the Phædon, where he says, "It is a very ancient opinion that souls quitting this world, repair to the infernal regions, and return after that, to live in this world." After the aiónion intoxication is over, they return to earth, which demonstrates that the world was not used by him as meaning endless. Again,(31) he speaks of that which is indestructible, (anolethron) and not aiónion. He places the two words in contrast, whereas, had he intended to use aiónion as meaning endless, he would have said indestructible and aiónion.
Once more,(32) Plato quotes four instances of aión, and three of aiónios, and one ofdiaiónios in a single passage, in contrast with aidios (eternal.) The gods he calls eternal, (aidios) but the soul and the corporeal nature, he says, are aiónios, belonging to time, and "all these," he says, "are part of time." And he calls Time [Kronos] an aiónios image of Aiónos. Exactly what so obscure an author may mean here is not apparent, but one thing is perfectly clear, he cannot mean eternity and eternal by aiónios and aiónion, for nothing is wider from the fact than that fluctuating, changing Time, beginning and ending, and full of mutations, is an image of Eternity. It is in every possible particular its exact opposite.
THE GREEK WORD AIÓN -- AIÓNIOS, TRANSLATED Everlasting – Eternal IN THE HOLY BIBLE, SHOWN TO DENOTE LIMITED DURATION. BY REV. JOHN WESLEY HANSON, A.M.
This is just the beginning of evidence that could be provided.
At the very least you would have to admit, there is reasonable evidence that “aionios” can mean limited duration.
If you don’t, then I go back to my original quote:
Ecumenicist
New member
logos_x said:
I get 'em also occasionally.
It comes with actually caring about the well being of others.
Studies show that "Hell ingrained in their heads" actually serves as an effective
empathy blocker...
PKevman
New member
EdCan said:
It's already actually been addressed before. But Christ is an eternal, divine Person. That is how he was able to take an eternal punishment but not need to be on the cross eternally. All of the sins that Christians ever committed or ever will commit were laid on His body at that time and on that cross. He paid the penalty for the sins of all those who believe on Him. Read my next round.
God bless.
PKevman
New member
Zadok said:
Zadok I am in the middle of a Battle Royale and I also work and have a family and a ministry. I told you that I wouldn't mind discussing this with you sometime down the line. But here is a question for you: Why should we accept the authority of Zadok as a Greek scholar over the myriads of Greek scholars who completely and utterly disagree with your interpretations and translations or the interpretations and translations of Universalism scholars and the folks at Tentmaker websites?
No offense, but I'll stick with Strong and Vine and other reputable, conservative scholars over liberal wackos!
God bless,
PK
By Pastor Kevin
I love this one... :jump:
Ok, let's talk about numbers here... let's see.... thousands of years, and many many generations of respected and well versed scholars completely disagree with YOU PK. They are (were) Roman Catholic.
Let's jump over to Muslims now, momentarily... hmmm.... Many many generations of past and current scholars that not only believe the Koran, but live daily by it in every detail.
Are you either Muslim or Catholic? I was under the impression that you were with the Protestant faith, in their non-denominational branch... if so, you should leave immediately. You have neither the numbers or history in your camp....
I love this one... :jump:
Ok, let's talk about numbers here... let's see.... thousands of years, and many many generations of respected and well versed scholars completely disagree with YOU PK. They are (were) Roman Catholic.
Let's jump over to Muslims now, momentarily... hmmm.... Many many generations of past and current scholars that not only believe the Koran, but live daily by it in every detail.
Are you either Muslim or Catholic? I was under the impression that you were with the Protestant faith, in their non-denominational branch... if so, you should leave immediately. You have neither the numbers or history in your camp....
PKevman
New member
When you can come up with one single verse in the Bible that clearly shows one individual (angel, human, or otherwise), being allowed out of the Lake of Fire, or leaving the Lake of Fire, then your argument might become more legitimate. It doesn't matter how many people you can say agree with what you say, your basic premise is destroyed by the light of the Word of God. It doesn't matter how many convincing arguments you try to write up, you cannot ever and will not ever be able to quantify the belief that someone in the Lake of Fire comes out.
Christ was persecuted because He spoke the truth and He exposed false teachers and members of the proud religious elite who thought they knew the Scriptures better than the One who inspired it.
This is exactly what we find in the false teaching of Universalism. Jesus says one thing, about eternal punishment and Universalism says another. Also the history of Universalism is hardly as strong as you would like to believe. Sure there were people who embraced Universalism in the past, going back to Origen. But Origen's doctrines were also considered heretical by the scholars of the day, so you can hardly say Universalism was widely embraced by the early church.
That is not to say that everyone trapped in the maze of Universalism doctrines is a bad person. In fact, as I said I happen to like Stephen very much. I don't blame the people who have embraced Universalism as much as I do the leaders who have propagated it. They will have to give an account to God one day for all the people they misled into believing they really didn't have to repent in this life, that all were saved in the end anyway.
I could have sworn however that the owner of this website already asked people to reserve this thread for discussing the Battle Royale however, so I will not be guilty of going against his wishes.
God bless and have a good night!
Christ was persecuted because He spoke the truth and He exposed false teachers and members of the proud religious elite who thought they knew the Scriptures better than the One who inspired it.
This is exactly what we find in the false teaching of Universalism. Jesus says one thing, about eternal punishment and Universalism says another. Also the history of Universalism is hardly as strong as you would like to believe. Sure there were people who embraced Universalism in the past, going back to Origen. But Origen's doctrines were also considered heretical by the scholars of the day, so you can hardly say Universalism was widely embraced by the early church.
That is not to say that everyone trapped in the maze of Universalism doctrines is a bad person. In fact, as I said I happen to like Stephen very much. I don't blame the people who have embraced Universalism as much as I do the leaders who have propagated it. They will have to give an account to God one day for all the people they misled into believing they really didn't have to repent in this life, that all were saved in the end anyway.
I could have sworn however that the owner of this website already asked people to reserve this thread for discussing the Battle Royale however, so I will not be guilty of going against his wishes.
God bless and have a good night!
Redfin
New member
PK, the only way you can legitimately win the real issue in this debate is to scripturally prove the immutability of one's salvational status after death.
You haven't done that.
Even the title of the debate (which I think was poorly worded) reveals your fatal flaw.
If you would be so kind as to indulge me by answering this one question:
How many that die as "unbelievers" will still be unbelievers by the time the judgment is over?
:think:
You haven't done that.
Even the title of the debate (which I think was poorly worded) reveals your fatal flaw.
If you would be so kind as to indulge me by answering this one question:
How many that die as "unbelievers" will still be unbelievers by the time the judgment is over?
:think:
Zero. You will know beyond any shadow of a doubt that God is real and the Bible is true.Redfin said:
Problem is, it is not the absolute knowledge that saves you. It is the faith that God is real and the Bible is true despite all "evidence" to the contrary that saves you.
Ephesians 2:7-9 (New International Version)
7in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast.
7in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast.
Redfin
New member
CabinetMaker said:
Bingo! Therefore, the proposition that PK is really asserting is that "Believers Will Spend Eternity In The Lake Of Fire"!
My guess is that by that time, they will be repentant believers as well.
Kinda makes the horrible reality of PK's position a little more stark, doesn't it?
CabinetMaker said:
Wrong.
The passage you quoted actually says that it is God's grace that saves us (see underlining above), and that faith is our means of appropriating (enjoying the benefits of) that salvation.
PK's task (or yours, if you'd like), is to scripturally prove the immutability of one's salvational status after death.
You've already admitted that people can change after death (from unbelievers to believers, or from ignorant to knowledgeable).
The only other option that I see would be to assert that God's grace is limited by human death.
You could assert that, but I doubt you could scripturally prove it. :think:
Redfin said:
Yes and you totally missed the point. It is not knowledge of Jesus that saves it is faith. When you are standing before Jesus there is no longer a need for faith. The choice you make while alive on this earth is the only one that matters.
In the entire new testament there is not one verse that teaches salvation is possible after death. Every NT verse that talks about physical death always holds that judgement follows.
Mathew talks of the sheep and goats standing before Jesus on judgement day, there is no offer of salvation to the goats.
Revelation talks of the reading of the names in the book of life. Those whos names are cast into the lake without an offer of salvation.
Hebrews 9:27
Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,
Now you must show me the verses that say there is salvation after death. Bet you can't.
Redfin
New member
CabinetMaker said:
Wrong again.
Since I've already shared the verse Logos shared that "says" it, now here are some that "teach" it.
I'll just cite the references this time, hoping that forcing you to actually open your Bible will cause you to become more familiar with its contents {gentle dig} :chuckle:
Matthew 9:25
Mark 5:42
Luke 7:15
John 11:44
Acts 9:40
Matthew 27:52
If those words don't teach you that the power and grace of God extend beyond death and the grave, I don't know what can.
- Status