LAKE OF FIRE (eternal pain)

[Original Happy Camper]

You quoted my post, how about extending me the common courtesy of addressing my post. This seems a lot like "My scripture trumps your scripture and you can't answer me."

​

I believe I did address one item in your post ".That the torment is everlasting, unending, "for ever and ever" is reinforced by the words "no rest day nor night." 10,000 times 10.000 eons from now God's unchanging word will still read "no rest day and night."

The only torment referenced in the Bible that is for ever and ever is that of the wicked in the lake of fire. The verse I quoted indicates a different interpretation of ever and ever needs to be understood, from the Bible, as the wicked are consumed and where they were burnt up in the lake of fire is where the righteous will walk on their ashes. So the fire must not still be burning for them to walk on the ashes.

 

[Der Alte]

Der Alter said: "Who is the savior Jesus or Paul? How does one verse by Paul refute one verse spoken by Jesus, as recorded by John who was an apostle taught by Jesus for 3+ years? We don't arbitrarily throw out Revelation because it contradicts someone's assumptions/presuppositions. Who is Tom Logan and what does he have to do with anything?"
1. Why do you ask?
2. Who said it did?
3. Who said we should?
4. The one whose work you copied & pasted.

1. Because you quoted it.
2. You implied it.
3. Ditto.
4. I cited it properly.

Der Alter said: "there is no basis for the amateurish conclusion that αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων means a supreme eon. There can be a supreme king one but how can there be a "supreme eon?" "
A definition of supreme is "highest in degree or quality":
The present "wicked" eon (Gal.1:4) will obviously not be of as high a quality as a future righteous eon. Get it now?

The present "wicked" eon, itself, is no different than any other eon. Wicked refers to the character of the people during that period, so one eon is no more supreme than any other eon. Aion of aions is a Hebraism, duplication for emphasis, emphasizing the eternity. I provided evidence if you choose to argue against it, please provide evidence.

Der Alter said: "I omitted the rest of your post I am here to discuss with other members not pages and pages of quotes from random websites. Here is my post on aion/aionios."
Obviously it's up to you whether you want to understand your debating opponent's positions.
I find it interesting you are not here to read "pages of quotes" & then post the same yourself immediately after saying that. I haven't seen anyone do that more than you & you do it often.

Understand my debating opponents positions? When said opponent states a position I will. I don't read or respond to lengthy copy/pastes of long polemic arguments, from universalist websites, with little or no scriptural or historical evidence,
.....The difference between what I do and what you do is I do not quote long prewritten arguments, I quote references such as lexicons, grammars, encyclopedias, and historical evidence such as ECF, ancient historians. Talmud, etc. If you cannot understand the difference perhaps you should be in less complex discussions.

 

[Der Alte]

The lake of fire is from an Egyptian myth that predates the oldest biblical texts by about 1500 years. It is not a real place. The notion was borrowed by Jewish writers. And yes, Jesus believed in it. What else would you expect from a pious, Pharmacy Jew?

Please cite your source. There is no such place in Egyptian mythology!

 

[Der Alte]

I believe I did address one item in your post ".That the torment is everlasting, unending, "for ever and ever" is reinforced by the words "no rest day nor night." 10,000 times 10.000 eons from now God's unchanging word will still read "no rest day and night."
The only torment referenced in the Bible that is for ever and ever is that of the wicked in the lake of fire. The verse I quoted indicates a different interpretation of ever and ever needs to be understood, from the Bible, as the wicked are consumed and where they were burnt up in the lake of fire is where the righteous will walk on their ashes. So the fire must not still be burning for them to walk on the ashes.

I showed by quoting Malachi 4:2 in context that it does not refer to the after life but what happens to the wicked on one day in this world. The lake of fire is called the second death, there will be no live people walking around on it.

 

[Steve Petersen]

Please cite your source. There is no such place in Egyptian mythology!

The Coffin Texts date from the First Intermediate Period of Egypt, from about 2181 BC to about 2055 BC. The Lake of Fire is Gate Three of the passage through the underworld.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Intermediate_Period_of_Egypt

https://sites.google.com/site/ancientegyptianmythology/the-afterlife

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/hell.htm

http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/maat.html

http://www.bibleorigins.net/hellsorigins.html

 

[Original Happy Camper]

I showed by quoting Malachi 4:2 in context that it does not refer to the after life but what happens to the wicked on one day in this world. The lake of fire is called the second death, there will be no live people walking around on it.

If your statement that "there will be no live people walking around on it" then pray tell where are the ashes that is spoken of in this verse as the only destruction of the wicked is after the second resurrection in the lake of fire.

Malachi 4:3
And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts.

 

[ClementofA]

Der Alter said: The present "wicked" eon, itself, is no different than any other eon. Wicked refers to the character of the people during that period, so one eon is no more supreme than any other eon. Aion of aions is a Hebraism, duplication for emphasis, emphasizing the eternity. I provided evidence if you choose to argue against it, please provide evidence.

An eon refers to time during which people necessarily live. So by implication it is the people within the eon that give it the quality of being "wicked" or righteous. A wicked eon is not of the same quality as a righteous eon. Instead the wicked is understood to be of inferior quality to a righteous eon.

Likewise "perilous times" (2 Tim.3:1) are of an inferior quality to the "times of restitution of all" (Acts 3:21).

Similarly if you are having a "good day" as opposed to a "bad hair day", you are describing a difference in quality between days. One is superior to or better than the other.

In a future eon/age there will be a "new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells". (2 Pet. 3:13). Thus it will be an eon that has the quality of righteousness. As such it is perfectly sensible to translate with the literal translation "the eon of the eons", & take it to be speaking of the best or superior eons of the eons.

Likewise with other Scriptural phrases of the same construction such as "song of songs" being, as you posted, the best song. Thus your example perfectly supports my comments re "eon of the eons". As did several of your other examples of the same construction, besides many others i could refer to.

There is no need to change the literal translation "eon of the eons" to "forever and ever". Likewise there is no need to change "song of songs" to "song *and* song" or to change "holy of holies" to "holy and holy" or to change "lord of lords" to "lord and lord". It would be silly to do so. Thus also with "forever *and* ever" which is self contradictory nonsense. The literal translation is the "eons *of* the eons".

Consequently the "eons of the eons" is not only the literal translation, it is in perfect accord with other phrases of the same kind, in accord with the grammar of the phrase, and makes perfect sense. None of this can be said of the rendering "forever & ever", which is not an decent translation, but a biased opinion, a mere commentary, in accord with the ECT belief.

Furthermore, if the eons end, then what is eonian and the eons of the eons, must also end. Thus they are not "endless" or with "no end", which indicates examples of how endlessness or eternity is correctly expressed in the Scriptures.

Moreover, there is the following:

"A comparison of Rev.11:14,15 with 1 Cor.15:27,28 makes it clear that the expression “the eons of the eons” does not mean an endless succession of eons. Christ reigns for “the eons of the eons” after which He delivers up the Kingdom to the Father and Himself becomes subject that God may be all in all."
http://www.saviourofall.org/Tracts/Eons2.html

"Why render "forever and ever" in the text and age of ages in the margin? Why render the adjective "eternal" and "everlasting"? Is this a faithful translation, or is it theological proclivity? A word that can mean anything means nothing.

"One particular error that is indefensible is the phrase "forever and ever." If "forever" means endlessly, the addition of "and ever" is tautological and meaningless. If, however, "forever" does not carry that connotation, then the additional "and ever" cannot impart such a meaning. This rendering is a theological contrivance which is defendable neither on linguistic nor philological grounds. Since the phrase contains two plural nouns, it should be translated ages of ages, or eons of eons.
http://www.heavendwellers.com/hd_eons_and_worlds.htm

"Dr. William Barclay concurs in his commentary (p. 166-169) on The Letters to the Corinthians. If the Greek words eis tous aionas ton aionon mean endless time, as translated in the KJV, "forever and ever," we have a contradiction in Scripture, for Rev. 11:15 says, in the same version: "The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever." That contradicts 1 Cor. 15:25, which says: "He must be reigning till..." If Rev. 11:15 is translated "eons of the eons," or "ages of the ages," there is no contradiction. The ASV says (1 Cor. 15:24-25), "Then cometh the end, when He shall deliver up the kingdom to God., even the Father; When He shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign till He hath put all His enemies under His feet;" consequently, the reigning of Christ Jesus and the saints (Rev. 22:5) will be "for the eons of the eons" or "for the ages of the ages" (see the ASV margin here)....

"Eis tous aionas is accusative plural, "for the eons," or "for the ages," and these words are not "forever and ever," which are in the singular. The word ton is the genitive plural article, and in our syntax should be translated "of the." In this Greek clause, there is no word that means "and," as the Greek conjunction kai; "and," is not in this clause. The word aionon is the genitive plural of the noun aion, and the genitive plural in this syntax should be translated "eons," or "ages;" hence ton aionon, "of the eons." Anyone can study these words and see that "forever and ever" is not a good translation of these Greek words."
-Dr. William Barclay

http://planetpreterist.com/content/forever-and-ever-poor-translation


Der Alter:.....The difference between what I do and what you do is I do not quote long prewritten arguments, I quote references such as lexicons, grammars, encyclopedias, and historical evidence such as ECF, ancient historians. Talmud, etc. If you cannot understand the difference perhaps you should be in less complex discussions.

Of course none of your "prewritten" offerings are intended by you as presenting a position or "arguments" for what you believe, eh?

Evidently you seem to love all kinds of carefully selected sources outside of the Scriptures, the ones biased to your ECT opinion. I was already aware of your fondness for looking to Jewish myths etc for the meaning of the Scripture.

"Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth." (Titus 1:14)

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" (2 Tim.3:16)

"Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (Acts 17:11)

Proverbs 8:10 Receive my instruction, and not silver; and knowledge rather than choice gold.

Psa.71:17 O God, thou hast taught me from my youth: and hitherto have I declared thy wondrous works.

 

[Der Alte]

Der Alter said: The present "wicked" eon, itself, is no different than any other eon. Wicked refers to the character of the people during that period, so one eon is no more supreme than any other eon. Aion of aions is a Hebraism, duplication for emphasis, emphasizing the eternity. I provided evidence if you choose to argue against it, please provide evidence.

All your argumentation and copy/pastes from biased universalist websites does not change the fact that αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων/aion ton aionon means "for ever and ever."
Exo 15:18 יהוה ימלך לעלם ועד׃
JPS Exodus 15:18 The LORD shall reign for ever and ever.
LXX Exo 15:18 κύριος βασιλεύων τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐπ᾿ αἰῶνα καὶ ἔτι.
τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐπ᾿ αἰῶνα
In the OT the phrase עולם ועד/olam w'ad or וד עולם/ad olam is translated in the 225 BC LXX as τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐπ᾿ αἰῶνα/aiona kai ep' aiona twenty three times. aiona kai ep' aiona is translated in the Jewish Publication Society English OT as "for ever and ever." Exo 15:18 and these nine vss. are the first 10 occurrences; 1 Chr 16:36, 29:10, Neh 9:5, Psa 9:5, 10:16, 21:4, 45:6,17, 48:14.

"A noun is repeated in the genitive plural in order to express very emphatically the superlative degree which does not exist in Hebrew. See under Idiom . Thus this figure is a kind of Enallage ( q.v. ), or exchange, by which a noun in the genitive plural, is used instead of a superlative adjective.
Rev. 1:6 . The ages of the ages , i.e. , to the remotest age, for ever and ever."
Figures of Speech used in the Bible, E.W. Bullinger
http://www.biblicalresearchjournal.org/brj-pages_pdf/001ewb_figures_of_speech.pdf​

An eon refers to time during which people necessarily live. So by implication it is the people within the eon that give it the quality of being "wicked" or righteous. A wicked eon is not of the same quality as a righteous eon. Instead the wicked is understood to be of inferior quality to a righteous eon.
[all discussion on this point omitted see above reply]

"Dr. William Barclay concurs in his commentary (p. 166-169) on The Letters to the Corinthians. If the Greek words eis tous aionas ton aionon mean endless time, as translated in the KJV, "forever and ever," we have a contradiction in Scripture, for Rev. 11:15 says, in the same version: "The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever." That contradicts 1 Cor. 15:25, which says: "He must be reigning till..." If Rev. 11:15 is translated "eons of the eons," or "ages of the ages," there is no contradiction. The ASV says (1 Cor. 15:24-25), "Then cometh the end, when He shall deliver up the kingdom to God., even the Father; When He shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign till He hath put all His enemies under His feet;" consequently, the reigning of Christ Jesus and the saints (Rev. 22:5) will be "for the eons of the eons" or "for the ages of the ages" (see the ASV margin here)....
"Eis tous aionas is accusative plural, "for the eons," or "for the ages," and these words are not "forever and ever," which are in the singular. The word ton is the genitive plural article, and in our syntax should be translated "of the." In this Greek clause, there is no word that means "and," as the Greek conjunction kai; "and," is not in this clause. The word aionon is the genitive plural of the noun aion, and the genitive plural in this syntax should be translated "eons," or "ages;" hence ton aionon, "of the eons." Anyone can study these words and see that "forever and ever" is not a good translation of these Greek words."
-Dr. William Barclay
planetpreterist.com

Dr. Barclay is only one scholar, please see my discussion above.

Der Alter:.....The difference between what I do and what you do is I do not quote long prewritten arguments, I quote references such as lexicons, grammars, encyclopedias, and historical evidence such as ECF, ancient historians. Talmud, etc. If you cannot understand the difference perhaps you should be in less complex discussions.
Of course none of your "prewritten" offerings are intended by you as presenting a position or "arguments" for what you believe, eh?

I see you still do not understand the difference. Here is an analogy. If I have a question about a legal situation I look up the applicable law(s) then I go to a law library and look up case law, i.e. cases involving that specific law which have been decided by different courts. I then know what the law says and how the courts have interpreted and applied it and know what I should and should not do.
_____Or I could do what I see being done here, go online to Randy Randoms blog, who is not a lawyer or a judge, and uncritically take his word for what the law means. I once saw a website which said that the income tax is illegal and people can refuse to pay the tax and the law can't do anything about it because the tax is illegal. I don't like paying income tax so should I do what the blog said or should I check out the law for myself?

Evidently you seem to love all kinds of carefully selected sources outside of the Scriptures, the ones biased to your ECT opinion. I was already aware of your fondness for looking to Jewish myths etc for the meaning of the Scripture.

Do you mean like the the "carefully selected sources outside of the Scriptures, the ones biased to your universalist opinion" such as saviorofall.org, heavendwellers.com and planetpreterist.com which you linked to in this post?

 

[ClementofA]

Der Alter posted: Rev. 1:6 . The ages of the ages , i.e. , to the remotest age, for ever and ever." Figures of Speech used in the Bible, E.W. Bullinger
http://www.biblicalresearchjournal.org/brj-pages_pdf/001ewb_figures_of_speech.pdf

If "ages of the ages" is taken to mean "to the remotest age" as Bullinger wrote above, then that could limit the duration of the "ages of the ages" to less than an endless duration in two ways: 1] because it is only up "to" the period in consideration, not "into" it, and 2] because the "remotest age" need not be endless, as Origen, others in the EC, the Scriptures, etc, can make a case for.

Der Alter said: Dr. Barclay is only one scholar, please see my discussion above.

Others are mentioned above. Also how many Greek Interlinears render the Greek phrase as "ages of the ages" or "eons of the eons" & similarly rather than "forever and ever"? Most of them, the vast majority?

Der Alter posts: All your argumentation and copy/pastes from biased universalist websites does not change the fact that αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων/aion ton aionon means "for ever and ever."
Exo 15:18 יהוה ימלך לעלם ועד׃
JPS Exodus 15:18 The LORD shall reign for ever and ever.
LXX Exo 15:18 κύριος βασιλεύων τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐπ᾿ αἰῶνα καὶ ἔτι. τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐπ᾿ αἰῶνα
In the OT the phrase עולם ועד/olam w'ad or וד עולם/ad olam is translated in the 225 BC LXX as τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐπ᾿ αἰῶνα/aiona
kai ep' aiona twenty three times. aiona kai ep' aiona is translated in the Jewish Publication Society English OT as "for ever and ever." Exo 15:18 and these nine vss. are the first 10 occurrences; 1 Chr 16:36, 29:10, Neh 9:5, Psa 9:5, 10:16, 21:4, 45:6,17, 48:14.

The 'word' of Der Alter, not the Word of the Lord! Just because you say it doesn't make it so. There's no "forever and ever" here:

Yahweh shall rule to the eon and beyond (Exo 15:18)
Universal Version Bible The Torah By William Petr
https://books.google.ca/books?id=XY6uCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA27&lpg=PA27&dq=Exodus+15:18+eon+and+further&source=bl&ots=zX9oRLelkn&sig=YQqAH9jd9DMC7ugEuy2uWQZZyJ8&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiau9yy6_vNAhVB6WMKHaG6AKIQ6AEITDAI#v=onepage&q=Exodus 15:18 eon and further&f=false

There's no self contradictory "forever and ever" there or in any of these for Exo.15:18:


ABP_Strongs The LORD reigning into the eon, and unto the eon, and still!
OJB Hashem shall reign l’olam va’ed.
YLT Jehovah reigneth -- to the age, and for ever!'*
Roth Yahweh, shall reign unto times age-abiding and beyond.
CLV Yahweh, He shall reign for the eon and further.
Vulgate(i) 18 Dominus regnabit in aeternum et ultra
Clementine_Vulgate(i) 18 Dominus regnabit in æternum et ultra.
Wycliffe(i) 18 The Lord schal `regne in to the world and ferthere.
Giguet(i) 18 Le Seigneur règne sur les siècles, sur les siècles et au delà.
SE(i) 18 El SEÑOR reinará por los siglos de los siglos.
ReinaValera(i) 18 Jehová reinará por los siglos de los siglos.
JBS(i) 18 El SEÑOR reinará por los siglos de los siglos.
ECB(i) 18 Yah Veh reigns eternally and eternally.
http://studybible.info/compare/Exodus 15:18

*YLT intro says "for ever" "eternal" "everlasting" should be understood as "age-during" everywhere in Scripture.
http://www.ccel.org/bible/ylt/ylt.htm

"Explanation of 100 Bible Terms.
"There cannot be the slightest doubt in the mind of any reflecting person but that a much greater amount of error in reference to the truths of the Word of God arises from simple ignorance or inattention than from any other worse cause whatever. Words, in the course of time, lose their original meaning, and acquire a conventional one very often considerably different, and which, from constant use, becomes little more than the shibboleth of a party. Very many are accustomed to use Scripture language without at all being able to understand its real meaning, and thus they are rather injured than benefited by their familiarity with Scripture phraseology."
http://www.ccel.org/bible/ylt/ylt.htm

“…shall lead him then his master to the judgment seat of God, and then lead him to the door, unto the doorpost, and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall serve him into the eon…”

"Into the eon could at most mean for lifetime here, imagine how ridiculous it would be to translate or to understand, a slave shall serve his master in eternity. My Torah commentary (German version of the Plaut Chumash) says, that the Rabbis understood forever (Hebrew olam) as until the Jubilee year. Rabbi Ibn Ezra: – “Le’olam, ‘for ever,' merely means a long time, i.e. till the year of jubilee.” – On Ex. xxi. 6.; so eis ton aiõna would mean until the Jubilee year here. The Vulgate has in saeculum, meaning age."
http://www.city-data.com/forum/christianity/686334-greek-eis-ton-aioona-what-does.html#ixzz4Ej9cF05A

Regarding 1 Tim.1:17..."Paul calls God 'King of the ages'...The Greek word aion transliterated to English as eon...This verse is quoting the divine title. Paul did not coin the title "King of the ages". The term existed as early as the second century B.C. in the book of Tobit, "Praise the Lord of Righteousness, and exalt the 'King of the ages'....Also in the book of Enoch, "And they said to the Lord of the ages: Lord of lords, God of gods, King of kings (and God of the ages)"....Respecting earthly monarchs, their rule does not extend into successive ages, whereas the rule of God does." [p.32]

Understanding the New Testament: 1st and 2nd Timothy, Titus, and Philemon
By William Victor Blacoe
https://books.google.ca/books?id=CsocamAWcXUC&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=Exodus+15:18+eon+and+further&source=bl&ots=kUY3zmlo1e&sig=joqTGrKD5rHWbz96wMEj3VriZMg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiau9yy6_vNAhVB6WMKHaG6AKIQ6AEIMTAD#v=onepage&q=Exodus 15:18 eon and further&f=false

"Respecting earthly monarchs, their rule does not extend into successive ages, whereas the rule of God does." Similarly Exodus 15:18 expresses the same idea, not anything about endless duration.

Also note the parallel between terms, in one sentence, one immediately after the other:
Lord of lords
God of gods
King of kings
God of the ages
[God of ages, not the 'God of eternity' or 'forevers' or 'forever and ever'. Not the God Who has "no end", which could have been said instead, as other Scriptures reveal]

"There is no doubt that Jerome was very much at sea with regard to these eon expressions. In Exodus 15:18 the Hebrew states that the Lord will reign "to the eon and further." The A.V. says "for ever and ever." The LXX puts "for the eon, and still more an eon, and further." Jerome, however, renders by the astounding statement that the Lord will reign "into eternity AND BEYOND" (in aeternum et ultra). . He repeats this absurdity in Micah 4:5."
http://alexanderthomson.blogspot.ca/2009/05/answer-to-challenge-of-hell.html

"In Exodus 15:18 and Micah 4:5 he has 'for aeternum and beyond'. Many other examples could be produced to show that for Jerome 'aeternum' probably did not represent a concept of absolute infinite duration."
http://www.tentmaker.org/books/time/Time_13.html

"Exodus 15:18

κυριος βασιλευων τον αιωνα και επ' αιωνα και ετι
Kyrios basileuõn ton aiõna kai ep aiõna kai eti
The Lord reigning into the eon, and unto eon, and still

"Into to the eon and still (or furthermore – kai eti), showing that eon itself is not endless, the Hebrew has something like olam va ed, for “olam” and furthermore, showing that whatever olam means, it can hardly mean endlessness, cause nothing goes beyond an endlessness. The Latin bible (Vulgate) has AETERNUM ET ULTRA – in eternity and beyond, showing that even Latin aeternum did not (necessarily) denote endlessness in Jerome’s days."
http://www.city-data.com/forum/christianity/686334-greek-eis-ton-aioona-what-does.html

“Yahweh, He shall reign for the eon and further” (Exodus 15:18); “the earth is standing for the eon” (Ecc.1:4). Yet the earth shall pass away.

Scripture speaks of “the oncoming eons” Eph.2:7); “the conclusion of the eon” (Matt.24: 3); “the conclusion of the eons” (Heb.9:26); and “the consummations of the eons” (1 Cor.10:11).

Regarding the phrase in Revelation:

"For ages of ages (eis tous aiõnas tõn aiõnõn)....
"Commonly translated for ever and ever, but this is actually no translation at all but rather an interpretation, it would then be for the evers of evers. The Latin has it right, SAECULA SAECULORUM, meaning literally ages of ages ...Now ages of ages in itself does not express eternity, it is a Hebrew idiom, like song of songs, it is an enhancement, but in quality not quantity, many universalists say, ages of ages mean the most important (future) ages (Eph. 2:7)"

http://www.city-data.com/forum/christianity/686334-greek-eis-ton-aioona-what-does.html#ixzz4EjE9v1mv"

"The English phrase, "for ever and ever", actually makes no sense when you pause to think about it. 'For ever' is, by definition, eternal. So how can there be more than 'eternal'? Some translators do a song-and-dance routine, attempting to show that the phrase is an idiom meaning "forever and ever". They say it signifies ages tumbling upon ages. If that were the case, then the Holy of Holies ought to be idiomatic of "Holy and Holies" which is nonsense. The Song of Songs should then be idiomatic for "Song and Songs". Or perhaps they want us to believe that the Holy of Holies is a Holy Place tumbling upon countless other holy places. Then the Song of Songs would be a Song with an infinite number of stanzas which is just as absurd.

"No, we have to dismiss this foolishness and call the translators to repent for trying to twist scripture to fit in with their traditions and preconceived doctrines. The Word of Yahweh must be allowed to speak itself through its own Hebraic lenses. Let's also stick to the principle of Occam's Razor which says that the simplest explanation is probably the correct one. So, the Bible talks about the Most Holy Place (Holy of Holies) and the greatest Song and the greatest of the Ages. If we accept the plain truth, then everything harmonises, confusion vanishes, and we arrive at a state of echad - oneness. So how did this confusion arise in the first place? (19)"
http://www.city-data.com/forum/christianity/686334-greek-eis-ton-aioona-what-does.html#ixzz4EjEvJJp6

Der Alter says: I see you still do not understand the difference.

As i see it the info i posted contained Scripture & an argument based on the same, which you refused to read or consider. Even a 5 second speed read through it could see Scripture was involved. OTOH you paste info from extra biblical sources & expect people to read yours. No doubt there are people who'd see this as a double standard.

 

[Super Kal]

If your statement that "there will be no live people walking around on it" then pray tell where are the ashes that is spoken of in this verse as the only destruction of the wicked is after the second resurrection in the lake of fire.

Malachi 4:3
And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts.

it's passages like Malachi 4:1-3 and Psalms 37 that many traditionalists have problems with, because these verses specifically state that the wicked do not endure for all eternity...
they either cavalier dismiss these scriptures, or cover their ears and resort to their own cognitive dissonance

 

[Der Alte]

Der Alter posted: Rev. 1:6 . The ages of the ages , i.e. , to the remotest age, for ever and ever." Figures of Speech used in the Bible, E.W. Bullinger
http://www.biblicalresearchjournal.org/brj-pages_pdf/001ewb_figures_of_speech.pdf
If "ages of the ages" is taken to mean "to the remotest age" as Bullinger wrote above, then that could limit the duration of the "ages of the ages" to less than an endless duration in two ways: 1] because it is only up "to" the period in consideration, not "into" it, and 2] because the "remotest age" need not be endless, as Origen, others in the EC, the Scriptures, etc, can make a case for.

You either did not read this or you did not understand it. Try again, “’The ages of the ages , i.e. , to the remotest age, for ever and ever.’ Figures of Speech used in the Bible, E.W. Bullinger” “i.e.” means”that is.” Thus “aionion ton aionion that is forever and ever.”This is from Bullinger’s book “figures of Speech used in the Bible. “Forever and ever” is not a contradiction it is a figure of speech.” And Read this again.

"A noun is repeated in the genitive plural in order to express very emphatically the superlative degree which does not exist in Hebrew. See under Idiom . Thus this figure is a kind of Enallage ( q.v. ), or exchange, by which a noun in the genitive plural, is used instead of a superlative adjective.” Bullinger.” ​

If you can provide scholarship which refutes this please do so, your unsupported opinion is not relevant. That is just reacting from your assumptions/presuppositions.

Der Alter said: Dr. Barclay is only one scholar, please see my discussion above.
Others are mentioned above. Also how many Greek Interlinears render the Greek phrase as "ages of the ages" or "eons of the eons" & similarly rather than "forever and ever"? Most of them, the vast majority?

My interlinear

Exo 15:18 יהוה H3068 The LORD ימלך H4427 shall reign לעלם H5769 forever ועד׃ H5703 and ever.​

Der Alter posts: All your argumentation and copy/pastes from biased universalist websites does not change the fact that αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων/aion ton aionon means "for ever and ever."
Exo 15:18 יהוה ימלך לעלם ועד׃
JPS Exodus 15:18 The LORD shall reign for ever and ever.
LXX Exo 15:18 κύριος βασιλεύων τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐπ᾿ αἰῶνα καὶ ἔτι. τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐπ᾿ αἰῶνα
In the OT the phrase עולם ועד/olam w'ad or וד עולם/ad olam is translated in the 225 BC LXX as τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐπ᾿ αἰῶνα/aiona kai ep' aiona twenty three times. "aiona kai ep' aiona" is translated in the Jewish Publication Society English OT as "for ever and ever." Exo 15:18 and these nine vss. are the first 10 occurrences of the 23; 1 Chr 16:36, 29:10, Neh 9:5, Psa 9:5, 10:16, 21:4, 45:6,17, 48:14.
.
The 'word' of Der Alter, not the Word of the Lord! Just because you say it doesn't make it so. There's no "forever and ever" here:

You don’t seem to be paying attention. This is not my word, I quoted from the Hebrew OT, the 225 BC LXX, and the 1917 Jewish Publication Society translation. Do you want to tell me that you and some guy named William Petr knows more about the Hebrew OT than the native Hebrew speaking Jewish scholars who translated the Hebrew OT into English more than 100 years ago.
Everything below which is not written by accredited Hebrew scholars will be deleted including William Petr.

OJB Hashem shall reign l’olam va’ed. [l’olam va’ed translated by native Hebrew speaking Jewish scholars in the JPS as “for ever and ever.”]
.
YLT Jehovah reigneth -- to the age, and for ever!'*[This contradicts your other quote from the YLT]
.
Vulgate(i) 18 Dominus regnabit in aeternum et ultra [“eternity” contradicts your argument]
Clementine_Vulgate(i) 18 Dominus regnabit in æternum et ultra. [“eternity” contradicts your argument]
…
ECB(i) 18 Yah Veh reigns eternally and eternally. [“eternity” contradicts your argument]
http://studybible.info/compare/Exodus 15:18
*YLT intro says "for ever" "eternal" "everlasting" should be understood as "age-during" everywhere in Scripture.
ccel.org/Bible/ylt

[City-data.com/forum omitted]
[book by William Victor Blacoe omitted]
[Alexanderthomson.blogspot omitted]
[tentmaker.org omitted]
[City-data.com/forum omitted]
[City-data.com/forum omitted]
[City-data.com/forum omitted]

Der Alter says: I see you still do not understand the difference.

As i see it the info i posted contained Scripture & an argument based on the same, which you refused to read or consider. Even a 5 second speed read through it could see Scripture was involved. OTOH you paste info from extra biblical sources & expect people to read yours. No doubt there are people who'd see this as a double standard.

You accept anything posted online, forums. Blogs, unknown writers which appears to support your assumptions/presuppositions. You arbitrarily reject Jewish historical references as “extrabiblical sources” then you quote all the stuff I omitted above. This is highly hypocritical.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

it's passages like Malachi 4:1-3 and Psalms 37 that many traditionalists have problems with, because these verses specifically state that the wicked do not endure for all eternity...
they either cavalier dismiss these scriptures, or cover their ears and resort to their own cognitive dissonance

Or they ignore the issue and change the subject as that appears to be what has happened to Der Alter as he has nit replied.

 

[Der Alte]

it's passages like Malachi 4:1-3 and Psalms 37 that many traditionalists have problems with, because these verses specifically state that the wicked do not endure for all eternity...
they either cavalier dismiss these scriptures, or cover their ears and resort to their own cognitive dissonance

Yes the annihilationists and conditionalists certainly do all have cognitive dissonance about these two verses. Neither verse says anything about man's eternal fate.

Malachi 4:1-3
(1) For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
...
(3) And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts.​

This passage is about what God does on one day in this world.

Psalm 37:1-2
(1) A Psalm of David. Fret not thyself because of evildoers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity.
(2) For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb.​

This Psalm is not about man's eternal fate but what happens to Israel's enemies in this life. They will be cut down like grass and wither like green plants. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:9 For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth.
10 For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be. ​

Evildoers cut off like flowers and green plants, vs. 2. Israel cannot see into eternity but they can see their enemies are no longer around to attack them. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:14-15
(14) The wicked have drawn out the sword, and have bent their bow, to cast down the poor and needy, and to slay such as be of upright conversation.
(15) Their sword shall enter into their own heart, and their bows shall be broken.​

The wicked attack Israel with the sword and bow but their sword will pierce their own heart and their bow broken. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:17 For the arms of the wicked shall be broken: but the LORD upholdeth the righteous. ​

The arms of the wicked are broken. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:20 But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away. ​

The wicked will consume away into smoke, in this world.

Psalm 37:22 For such as be blessed of him shall inherit the earth; and they that be cursed of him shall be cut off.​

Those who are cursed by God will be cut off like flowers, wither like green plants, in this world., vs. 2. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:28 For the LORD loveth judgment, and forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved for ever: but the seed of the wicked shall be cut off.
.
Psalm 37:34 Wait on the LORD, and keep his way, and he shall exalt thee to inherit the land: when the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it.
.
Psalm 37:36 Yet he passed away, and, lo, he was not: yea, I sought him, but he could not be found.
.
Psalm 37:38 But the transgressors shall be destroyed together: the end of the wicked shall be cut off.​

The wicked will be cut off like flowers, wither like green plants, vs. 2. Israel cannot see into eternity but they can see what happens to their enemies in this world. That is not annihilation.

 

[Der Alte]

Or they ignore the issue and change the subject as that appears to be what has happened to Der Alter as he has nit replied.

I have a life, tough if I don't reply to every spam post in this thread within 20 nano seconds after it is posted. See my reply above.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Yes the annihilationists and conditionalists certainly do all have cognitive dissonance about these two verses. Neither verse says anything about man's eternal fate.

Malachi 4:1-3
(1) For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
...
(3) And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, saith the LORD of hosts.​

This passage is about what God does on one day in this world.

Psalm 37:1-2
(1) A Psalm of David. Fret not thyself because of evildoers, neither be thou envious against the workers of iniquity.
(2) For they shall soon be cut down like the grass, and wither as the green herb.​

This Psalm is not about man's eternal fate but what happens to Israel's enemies in this life. They will be cut down like grass and wither like green plants. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:9 For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth.
10 For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be. ​

Evildoers cut off like flowers and green plants, vs. 2. Israel cannot see into eternity but they can see their enemies are no longer around to attack them. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:14-15
(14) The wicked have drawn out the sword, and have bent their bow, to cast down the poor and needy, and to slay such as be of upright conversation.
(15) Their sword shall enter into their own heart, and their bows shall be broken.​

The wicked attack Israel with the sword and bow but their sword will pierce their own heart and their bow broken. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:17 For the arms of the wicked shall be broken: but the LORD upholdeth the righteous. ​

The arms of the wicked are broken. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:20 But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the LORD shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away. ​

The wicked will consume away into smoke, in this world.

Psalm 37:22 For such as be blessed of him shall inherit the earth; and they that be cursed of him shall be cut off.​

Those who are cursed by God will be cut off like flowers, wither like green plants, in this world., vs. 2. That is not annihilation.

Psalm 37:28 For the LORD loveth judgment, and forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved for ever: but the seed of the wicked shall be cut off.
.
Psalm 37:34 Wait on the LORD, and keep his way, and he shall exalt thee to inherit the land: when the wicked are cut off, thou shalt see it.
.
Psalm 37:36 Yet he passed away, and, lo, he was not: yea, I sought him, but he could not be found.
.
Psalm 37:38 But the transgressors shall be destroyed together: the end of the wicked shall be cut off.​

The wicked will be cut off like flowers, wither like green plants, vs. 2. Israel cannot see into eternity but they can see what happens to their enemies in this world. That is not annihilation.

In my earlier post "If your statement that "there will be no live people walking around on it" then pray tell where are the ashes that is spoken of in this verse as the only destruction of the wicked is after the second resurrection in the lake of fire."

Please answer the above question concerning the walking on the ashes of the wicked, where does this Take place?

 

[Original Happy Camper]

I have a life, tough if I don't reply to every spam post in this thread within 20 nano seconds after it is posted. See my reply above.

You response above is in accurate as the post with the question was on Saturday at 6:25 PM

 

[Der Alte]

In my earlier post "If your statement that "there will be no live people walking around on it" then pray tell where are the ashes that is spoken of in this verse as the only destruction of the wicked is after the second resurrection in the lake of fire."
Please answer the above question concerning the walking on the ashes of the wicked, where does this Take place?

I answered this already and my reply in the post you quoted also answers it. Malachi 4:1-3 is not about man's eternal fate but what happens to the unrighteous on one day in this world. Vs. one "the day cometh,""the day that cometh" vs. 3 "in the day that I shall do this," As bad as you want it to be that to fit your assumptions/presuppositions there is not one verse which speaks of the righteous being in the lake of fire treading on ashes.

 

[Der Alte]

You response above is in accurate as the post with the question was on Saturday at 6:25 PM

Your opinion is irrelevant to me.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

I answered this already and my reply in the post you quoted also answers it. Malachi 4:1-3 is not about man's eternal fate but what happens to the unrighteous on one day in this world. Vs. one "the day cometh,""the day that cometh" vs. 3 "in the day that I shall do this," As bad as you want it to be that to fit your assumptions/presuppositions there is not one verse which speaks of the righteous being in the lake of fire treading on ashes.

You are correct the righteous are not in the lake of fire for the wicked have been consumed and the fire has gone out only thing left is the ashes of the wicked to be walked upon.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Your opinion is irrelevant to me.

Ok with me, by your arrogance you appear to think that you are above the rest of the folks on this forum.

Matthew 5:5
Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.