LAKE OF FIRE (eternal pain)

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[Steve Petersen]

Watch for the Verily, verily I say unto thee.
truly, truly I say unto thee

He that heareth My word

Keep My sayings

Does this mean you have run out of arguments?

 

[vinsight4u]

/

 

[Der Alte]

That was from Greek scholar Marvin Vincent. Re aion, the equivalent of olam, he says:
"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."
"...The adjective aionios in like manner carries the idea of time. Neither the noun nor the adjective, in themselves, carry the sense of endless or everlasting."
".... Aionios means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods."
"...Words which are habitually applied to things temporal or material can not carry in themselves the sense of endlessness."
"...There is a word for everlasting if that idea is demanded."
http://www.temcat.com/L-4-Topical-Library/Reference/Word-StudiesNT3_4.PDF
Namely AIDIOS. Not AION/IOS.

I already addressed this a thread somewhere if not this one. Your source does not say, as you claim, ..."There is a word for everlasting if that idea is demanded...Namely AIDIOS. Not AION/IOS." It says aionios twice. I'm sure that since Vincent agrees with your assumptions/presuppositions you think he must be the greatest Greek scholar ever but remember I have quoted 9 Greek sources. If you think Vincent is correct and the other 9 incorrect you must prove it not just assume it. Good luck with that.

It seems the above is much the same as what we see from early church father Greek scholar Origen and other leading church universalists, both ancient and modern. And in harmony with what i've posted re Greek scholar Deissman, lexicons, Jewish opinions, internal Scriptural evidences, etc.

Other than Origen you have not quoted any "leading church universalists" and unless you can quote a majority it does not mean anything. There were many heretics in the early church Montanus, Arius, etc. So quoting an opposing opinion does not make it valid. You have not quoted Deissman from the primary source, only copy/pastes from tentmaker. Modern Jewish opinions from a website are irrelevant. I quoted from historical Jewish sources which have never been disproved. What "internal scriptural evidence" are you talking about?

I've already commented on your JPS. You showed no evidence the LXX translators would agree with JPS or disagree with literal translations of the Hebrew OT that i posted. Furthermore, for all we know your biased JPS translators were deeply divided in their opinions re translating olam. Or had no interest in making a literal non idiomatic version, but rather one that would be pleasing to the majority of the book purchasing "world" (of which the Scriptures tell us, Satan is god of).

If you think the JPS scholars were divided, disinterested, or anything else you must prove it not just suggest it and act like it has been proven. If you want to play this game start proving that Ramelli, Deissman, Origen and anyone else you quote, were not biased, etc.

 

[Der Alte]

What evidence do you have they are not literal translations? Any at all? Do you deny that literal translations exist? Are you calling them liars when they say they are literal translations?

A literal translation may exist but there is more than one "literal translation" around and they are not exactly the same. So which one is the really, truly literal translation and how do you know?

Aren't you the one always touting anti literal idiomatic translation when it comes to aion/ios & olam words & expressions? Yes.

Yes and when I do I provide evidence. I think I even found a reference to "
hyperbole" in one of the sources you linked to.

The fact is aion transliterated is eon, not forever. And aionion transliterated is eonian, not eternal. And "ages of the ages" [or eons of the eons] is a literal translation, not "forever and ever". Do you deny this?

That fact that "aion" is transliterated "eon" is irrelevant. The Hebrew "Yeshua" is transliterated "Jesus" in English. "Yeshua" means "Yahweh saves" in Hebrew, "Jesus" does not.

If not, then why do your KJV tradition translations usually mistranslate these words, IOW interpret them for the public, instead of translate them literally and let the public interpret the meaning themselves? Because they [or the powers behind them] wish their interpretations, pretending to be faithful translations, would become an alternate Pope for the Sola Scriptura peoples?

The KJV was translated by the Anglican church not the RCC. No mistranslation as I have proved from 9 Greek language sources.

The antibiblical sadistic ECT opinion in these more enlightened times is falling, with CI & UR on the rise. Unlike during the times of the RCC dark ages (roughly 600-1600 AD) of inquisitions, crusades, burnings of heretics & their writings.

Irrelevant tirade. If you have evidence to provide, do so, I'm not interested in rambling, raging diatribes.

 

[ClementofA]

Other than Origen you have not quoted any "leading church universalists" and unless you can quote a majority it does not mean anything.

Because the "majority" opinion is always the truth, eh?

Rome wasn't built in a day. For now i'll leave you with this re a non universalist:

"As I pointed out elsewhere, J.I. Packer (while not highly qualified in this area) is one non universalist theologian who does agree that "aionios" does not in itself mean "endless", as expressed in one of the articles posted by Alex. He doesn't derive the doctrine of eternal punishment from the definition of aionios, but from the fact that the punishment (as described in Matt 25) is "of the age to come" which he assumes is never-ending, and in comparison to the "aionios zoe" of the righteous which, we have reason to believe, will not end."

http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1418

 

[Der Alte]

Because the "majority" opinion is always the truth, eh?

Endlessly quoting one ECF, Origen, certainly doesn't make it the truth.

Rome wasn't built in a day. For now i'll leave you with this re a non universalist:
"As I pointed out elsewhere, J.I. Packer (while not highly qualified in this area) is one non universalist theologian who does agree that "aionios" does not in itself mean "endless", as expressed in one of the articles posted by Alex. He doesn't derive the doctrine of eternal punishment from the definition of aionios, but from the fact that the punishment (as described in Matt 25) is "of the age to come" which he assumes is never-ending, and in comparison to the "aionios zoe" of the righteous which, we have reason to believe, will not end."
http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1418

A 2nd-3rd hand quote from some author giving his unsupported opinion. Virtually meaningless. ETA: Clicked on your link and could not find anything on J.I. Packer.
What would be meaningful would be direct quotes from ancient scholars showing that aion/aionios do not mean eternity/eternal. Just quoting some uses of either word is not sufficient. You quoted Gesenius, post #228 this thread, out-of-context I might add, as authoritative but even he said that "Hebrews use the metaphysical notion of eternity by hyperbole, in speaking of human things."

The true notion of eternity is found in this word in those passages which speak of the immortal nature of God himself who is called "el olam" the eternal God, Gen. 21 33 Isa. 40:28; "hai haolam" who liveth for ever, Dan. 12:7 (compare "hayah haolam" to live for ever, to be immortal, like gods [rather like God himself] Gen. 3:22; Job 7: 16), to whom are ascribed Deut. 33:27 everlasting arms, Deut. 33 :27; and of whom it is said. Ps. 90:2 "meolam w’ad olam ethah el" “from everlasting to everlasting thou art God;” 103:17. compare Psa.9:8: 10:16; 29:10, 29:1o; 93:2; 10:16. Also a peculiar class is formed of those places — (e) in which the Hebrews use the metaphysical notion of eternity by hyperbole, in speaking of human things, especially in the expression of good wishes.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=kjv&strongs=h5769​

 

[ClementofA]

Endlessly quoting one ECF, Origen, certainly doesn't make it the truth.

Countless millions of Christians have believed in universalism.

The time when Christians believed it the least was in the darkest ages of church history.

 

[ClementofA]

A 2nd-3rd hand quote from some author giving his unsupported opinion.

Packer is not alone:

"Because aionios should most likely be understood to mean "belonging to an age (or ages)" or "age-lasting" in both the NT and the LXX, the Greek expression zoe aionios (commonly rendered "eternal life" or "everlasting life") should best be understood to mean "age-lasting life" or "the life of the age." A number of contemporary Christian theologians and scholars (such as J.I. Packer, C.H. Dodd, John Painter, George Eldon Ladd, N.T. Wright, John G. Stackhouse and Alan Richardson) acknowledge that zoe aionios should best be understood to mean "the life of the age." See, e.g., C.H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the First Gospel, pp. 144-50; George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, pp. 290-292; J.I.Packer, "The Problem of Eternal Punishment," Crux XXVI.3, September 1990, 23; "Evangelical Annihilationism in Review," Reformation & Revival, Volume 6, Number 2 - Spring 1997; John Painter, 1, 2 and 3 John (Sacra Pagina), p. 195; Alan Richardson, An Introduction to the Theology of the New Testament, pp.73-74; John G. Stackhouse, Jr. "Jesus Christ," The Oxford Handbook of Evangelical Theology, p. 151; N.T. Wright, Romans, p. 530."

http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=2626&p=36115&hilit=packer#p36115

 

[ClementofA]

No mistranslation as I have proved from 9 Greek language sources.

You might as well have cited "the Pope". Nine sources that provide no reasons for their views are next to useless. They may or may not provide any references and seldom if ever quote there sources in context or at all. One of them, Thayer, as i posted before, was outdated almost from its publication.

"BDAG is foreign language dictionary of a very small number of works in Greek, and in a very limited number of senses."

"...It is correct as Stephen says that a lexicon uses a small number of works; some use more works and others less. Moreover, lexicons do not give the lexical meaning of a word but rather glosses which show how the word is used and translated. To make a personal study of Greek works may give good results, and while doing this, we should keep in mind that the meaning and references of a word may change through time."

http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2328

For example Plato's timeless definition of aioinios is irrelevant when it comes to Scripture since the Bible never uses the word that way.

 

[Steve Petersen]

How many of the Apostles spoke Greek?

 

[Der Alte]

Packer is not alone:
"Because aionios should most likely be understood to mean "belonging to an age (or ages)" or "age-lasting" in both the NT and the LXX, the Greek expression zoe aionios (commonly rendered "eternal life" or "everlasting life") should best be understood to mean "age-lasting life" or "the life of the age."

You still don't get it do you? The comments above were made by someone using the name Aaron on a universalist forum, similar to this one, therefore are worthless as evidence for anything.

A number of contemporary Christian theologians and scholars (such as J.I. Packer, C.H. Dodd, John Painter, George Eldon Ladd, N.T. Wright, John G. Stackhouse and Alan Richardson) acknowledge that zoe aionios should best be understood to mean "the life of the age." See, e.g., C.H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the First Gospel, pp. 144-50; George Eldon Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament, pp. 290-292; J.I.Packer, "The Problem of Eternal Punishment," Crux XXVI.3, September 1990, 23; "Evangelical Annihilationism in Review," Reformation & Revival, Volume 6, Number 2 - Spring 1997; John Painter, 1, 2 and 3 John (Sacra Pagina), p. 195; Alan Richardson, An Introduction to the Theology of the New Testament, pp.73-74; John G. Stackhouse, Jr. "Jesus Christ," The Oxford Handbook of Evangelical Theology, p. 151; N.T. Wright, Romans, p. 530."
http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=2626&p=36115&hilit=packer#p36115

A blanket statement a group of scholars supposedly "acknowledge that zoe aionios should best be understood to mean 'the life of the age.'" followed by some information about books the group of scholars wrote but no quotes what they actually said. Here for example what Packer actually said.

In an article which appeared in 1990,13 Packer responds to his friend in three ways. First is the biblical argument. According to Packer, there is just too much evidence from Scripture that Hell is eternal. Matthew 25:46, for example, speaks in parallel of “eternal life” and “eternal punishment.” Surely, the argument runs, if we are to doubt that Hell is “eternal” we would be led to say that its parallel—eternal life—must also be doubted. Similarly, for Packer and others, 2 Thessalonians 1:8–9 speaks of those who do not know God in Jesus Christ being “punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the majesty of his power.” Packer is not convinced that these texts can be made to speak of annihilation, and attempts to do so, by Stott and others, he refers to as “avalanche-dodging.” Packer goes on, however, to attempt to show that the doctrine of Hell should not be thought of in crudely physical terms. Packer is convinced that the imagery of Hell is, indeed, metaphorical. He even thinks that Jonathan Edwards’s sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” which has become the classic statement of the traditional doctrine of Hell, was meant to be understood metaphorically. But here Packer runs into trouble, since he has no desire to downplay the seriousness of Hell. “Do not try to imagine what it is like to be in hell,” he says. “The mistake is to take such pictures as physical descriptions, when in fact they are symbolizing realities . . far worse than the symbols themselves.”
13 J. I. Packer, “The Problem of Eternal Punishment,” Crux 26, no. 3 (September 1990): 18–25.
http://www.anglicantheologicalreview.org/static/pdf/articles/lemarquand.pdf ​

 

[Der Alte]

You might as well have cited "the Pope". Nine sources that provide no reasons for their views are next to useless. They may or may not provide any references and seldom if ever quote there sources in context or at all. One of them, Thayer, as i posted before, was outdated almost from its publication.
"BDAG is foreign language dictionary of a very small number of works in Greek, and in a very limited number of senses."
"...It is correct as Stephen says that a lexicon uses a small number of works; some use more works and others less. Moreover, lexicons do not give the lexical meaning of a word but rather glosses which show how the word is used and translated. To make a personal study of Greek works may give good results, and while doing this, we should keep in mind that the meaning and references of a word may change through time."
http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=2328

You're joking right? Quoting some conversations by an anonymous person on BGreek, a forum similar to this one, as evidence that the 9 sources I quoted were supposedly wrong? Let's get real.

For example Plato's timeless definition of aioinios is irrelevant when it comes to Scripture since the Bible never uses the word that way.

Now you are a Greek expert and you claim to know how Plato used the word aionios and that the NT supposedly does not use it the same way? When you earn a degree in Greek and have a decade or two of research then you might have the knowledge to make such a statement.
ETA: The lexicon entry from BDAG for aionios. The external sources for this one word highlighted in blue.

αιωνιος ( ια) Pla., Tim. 38n; Jer 39: 40; Exk 37: 26; 2 Th 2: 16; Hb 9:12; as v.1.
Ac 13: 48; 2 Pt 1:11; BID. §59, 2;Mlt H. 157), ον eternal (since Hyperid. 6, 27; PlL; inscr., pap., LXX; Ps. -Phoc. 112; Test 12 Patr.; standing epithet for princely, esp. imperial power: Dit., Or. Index VIII; BGU 176; 303; 309; Sb 7517, 5[211/2 AD] (kurios ai; al. in pap.; Jos., Ant 7, 352).
1. without beginning xponois ai, long ages ago Ro 16: 25; pro kronon ai before time began 2 Ti 1: 9; Tit 1: 2 (on xponos ai. cf. Dit., Or. 248, 54; 383, 10).
2. without beginning or end; of God (Ps. -Pla., Tim. Locr. 96c theon t. aionion Inscr. in the Brit Mus. 894 aai. k. thantos; Gen 21: 33; Is 26: 4; 40: 28; Bar 4: 8 al.; Philo, Plant 8; 74; Sib. Or., fgm. 3, 17 and 4; PGM 1, 309; 13, 280) Ro 16: 26; of the Holy Spirit in Christ Hb 9: 14. thronos ai. 1 Cl 65: 2 (cf. 1 Macc 2: 57).
3. without end (Diod. S.1, 1,5; 5, 73, 115, 66,1 doxa ai.. everlasting fame; in Diod. S.1, 93, 1 the Egyptian dead are said to have passed to their ai. oike’sis; Arrian, Peripi. 1, 41 es mne’mne’n ai.; JOS., Bell. 4, 461 ai. xaris a gracious gift for all future time; Dit, Or. 383, 10 [I BC] eis kronos ai.; ECEOwen, 011(0' aL.: JTS 38, '37, 248-50) of the next life ske’nai Lk 16: 9 (Cf. En. 39, 5). oikia, contrasted w. the oikia epigeios, of the glorified body 2 Cor 5:1. diatheke (Gen 9:16; 17: 7; Les' 24: 8; 2 Km 23: 5 al.) Hb 13: 20. evanggelion Rv 14: 6; kratos in a doxolog. formula (=eis to aio’nas') 1 Ti6: 16. parakle’sis 2 Th 2:16. lutro’sis Hb 9:12. kle’ronomia (Esth 4: 17 m) vs. 15; ai. apexein tina’ (opp. pros ora’n) keep someone forever PhIm 15 (cf. Job 40: 28). Very often of God's judgment (Diod. S.4, 63, 4 dia te’n asebeian en adou diatelein timo’rias aio’nion tuyxanonta; similarly 4, 69, 5; Jer 23: 40; Da 12: 2; Ps 76: 6; 4 Macc 9: 9; 13:15) kolasis ai. (Test Reub. 5: 5) Mt 25: 46; 2 Cl 6: 7; krima ai. Hb 6: 2; thanatos B 20:1. olethron (4 Macc 10:15) 2 Th 1:9. pur (4 Macc 12:12.-Sib. Or. 8,401 phos ai.) Mt 18: 8; 25: 41; Jd 7; Dg 10: 7 (IQS 2, 8). amarte’ma Mk 3:29 (v. 1 kriseo’s and amartias. On the other hand of eternal life (Maximus Tyr. 6, id theou ai.; Diod. S.8, 15, 3 life meta ton thanaton lasts eis apanta aio’na; Da 12: 2; 4 Macc 15: 3; PsSol 3, 12; Philo, Fuga 78; JOS., Bell. 1,650; Sib. Or. 2, 336) in the Kingdom of God: zoe’ ai.. Mt 19:16, 29; 25:46; Mk 10:17, 30; Lk 10: 25; 18:18, 30; Ac 13:46, 48; Ro 2: 7; 5: 21 al.; J 3: 1Sf, 36; 4:14, 36 al.; 1 J 1:2; 2: 25aI.-D 10:3; 2C15: 5; 8:4,6; lEph 18:1; Hv 2, 3,2; 3,8,4 ai. Also basileia ai.. 2Pt 1:11 (Cf. Da 4: 3; 7: 27; Phila, Somn. 2, 285; Dit, Or. 569, 24 upper te’s aio’niou kai afthrton basileia umon; Dssm. B 27~, BS 363). Of the glory in the next life doxa ai.. 2 Ti 2: 10 (Cf. Wsd 10:14; JOS., Ant 15, 376.-Sib. Or. 8, 410). aionion baros doxe’s 2 Cor 4: 17; soteria ai.. (Is 45: 17; Ps. -Clem., Ham. 1, 19) Hb 5: 9; short ending of Mk. Of heavenly glory in contrast to the transitory world of the senses ta me’ bleptommena Aio’nia; 2 Cor 4: 18 xara IPhid inscr.; doxazesthai aio’nio’ ergo’ be glonfied by an everlasting deed IPol 8:1. DHill, Gk. Words and Hebr. Mngs. '67,186-201. M-M.
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Early Christian Literature, Walter Bauer, William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, Frederick W. Danker, University of Chicago Press, 1958​