Conditional Immortality Supports Annihilationion, Refutes Eternal Conscious Torment and Universalism

ClementofA · Nov 12, 2017

Der Alter said:
How does Philo specifically define "eternity" in Prov. 1.7; Op. 7; Aet. 83-84? "in eternity nothing is past and nothing is future, but everything is present only."

Is this related to Plato's idea of a timeless eternity outside of, or after, time? It isn't the way Scripture uses aion or aionios, if either of those words are being used in your Philo quote, rather than another word such as aidios.

Der Alter said:
I would have to see those quotes in-context because the "unlimited aion" is out-of-context.

See p.241-2 of Keizer's book.

Der Alter said:
Here is the unlimited aion quote in-context. Philo is paraphrasing Exod. 15:18 from the LXX.

Der Alter said:
(use) Ton apeiron aiôna, the unlimited aiön”, is Philo's paraphrase of the more-than-aion expression in Exod. 15:18 describing God's kingship. Before Philo. ton apeiron aiona is attested only once, in a fragment from Aristotle where it has the (non-philosophical) sense of “all. endless, time” (Chapter II text [33]). (meaning) The present passage appears to use the phrase in the same sense, while emphasizing the notion of continuity by the words “not for one moment ungoverned” and "uninterrupted”.

So again: Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell

Der Alte · Nov 12, 2017

ClementofA said:
Is this related to Plato's idea of a timeless eternity outside of, or after, time? It isn't the way Scripture uses aion or aionios, if either of those words are being used in your Philo quote, rather than another word such as aidios.

Your source, you back it up.

See p.241-2 of Keizer's book.

Yes and?

So again: Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Did you read my post? Philo was paraphrasing the LXX, not writing his own thoughts.

Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

Maybe, maybe not. Quote the passages in context and then we'll talk. I have shown that the "unlimited aion" reference was out-of-context. I, OTH, have shown how Philo understood "eternity" in his own words. "in eternity nothing is past and nothing is future, but everything is present only."

ClementofA · Nov 12, 2017

Der Alter said:
Your source, you back it up.

It was your quote. English only. Without evidence that the words under discussion, aion & aionios, even exist in it.

Der Alter said:
Yes and?

You said you needed to see the "long aion" quotes in context. I said see p.241-2.

Der Alter said:
Did you read my post? Philo was paraphrasing the LXX, not writing his own thoughts.

And he speaks of an "unlimited aion". So again: Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Der Alter said:
Maybe, maybe not. Quote the passages in context and then we'll talk.

See Keizer p.241-2 & appendix for quotes in Greek, English translation & references in Philo where they are found.

Der Alter said:
I have shown that the "unlimited aion" reference was out-of-context.

All you did was quote the following from the book. How does that prove anything was out of context:

Ton apeiron aiôna, the unlimitedaiön”, is Philo's paraphrase of the more-than-aion expression in Exod. 15:18 describing God's kingship. Before Philo. ton apeiron aiona is attested only once, in a fragment from Aristotle where it has the (non-philosophical) sense of “all. endless, time” (Chapter II text [33]). (meaning) The present passage appears to use the phrase in the same sense, while emphasizing the notion of continuity by the words “not for one moment ungoverned” and "uninterrupted”.

Der Alter said:
I, OTH, have shown how Philo understood "eternity" in his own words. "in eternity nothing is past and nothing is future, but everything is present only."

The topic is aion & aionios. Does your quote even use the words? Is your quote in regards to philosophical classical Greek such as in Plato or Aristotle? Yes. Does Scripture - ever - use aion/ios in that sense? No. Therefore your English only quote of Philo, even if it uses aion or aionios, is irrelevant to the topic. What is of interest is Philo's usage of the words aion & aionios in regards to everyday common Koine Greek and in the Greek OT of his time.

Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

AIÓN -- AIÓNIOS
The Greek Words "aion" and "aionios," do these words mean "eternal" or "everlasting"?

pat34lee · Nov 12, 2017

Jason0047 said:
Uh.... breaking God's covenant is bad.

28 "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?" (Hebrews 10:28-29).

In a tribal society, the worst thing is to lose your place in it,
or your family's place. Death is preferable.

Der Alte · Nov 12, 2017

ClementofA said:
It was your quote. English only. Without evidence that the words under discussion, aion & aionios, even exist in it.

Gladly. Here from your link

It is when Philo concentrates on that which comes closest to God that he starts speaking of aion. Just as in Mut. 267 [91. aion is preceded and introduced by “the archetype and paradigm of time”. Philo concludes that “in aion nothing is past nor will be future. but it is only in a present state”.

Don't you just hate it when one of your out-of-context references proves you wrong?

You said you needed to see the "long aion" quotes in context. I said see p.241-2.

P. 241-2 of what?

And he speaks of an "unlimited aion". So again: Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Did you not understand me when I told you twice that the words "unlimited aion" are not Philo's words they are a paraphrase of the LXX? You will have to find yourself another proof text, Philo's own words.

See Keizer p.241-2 & appendix for quotes in Greek, English translation & references in Philo where they are found.

What exactly is Keizer?

All you did was quote the following from the book. How does that prove anything was out of context:

Ton apeiron aiôna, the unlimited aiön”, is Philo's paraphrase of the more-than-aion expression in Exod. 15:18 describing God's kingship. Before Philo. ton apeiron aiona is attested only once, in a fragment from Aristotle where it has the (non-philosophical) sense of “all. endless, time” (Chapter II text [33]). (meaning) The present passage appears to use the phrase in the same sense, while emphasizing the notion of continuity by the words “not for one moment ungoverned” and "uninterrupted”.

The words "the unlimited aion" are not Philo's but a paraphrase of the LXX. The rest of your irrelevant repetition ignored and omitted. Your own source, from which the "unlimited aion" is quoted in Philo's own words “in aion nothing is past nor will be future. but it is only in a present state.” p.224
Life Time Entirety. A Study of AION in Greek Literature and Philosophy, the Septuagint and Philo
Perhaps you should refrain from copy/pasting everything from tents-r-us and do your own research. Just saying.
ETA:As for Philo's "long aioned" I found this on p. 242 of Keizer

Just as in text [24]. it is in connection to a quotation from the Pentateuch which speaks of- to live (this time Deut 4:4, for which see also text [5]). that Philo speaks here of the life par excellence—which he now calls “long-aioned life'. (meaning). The element "long” in the latter term obviously does not have the implication of “but not everlasting”. since an equivalent term is immortal life’ (see the last line).’ Thus zoe makraion appears to be synonymous with zöë aionios: where text [24] speaks of zöë aiönios as the contrary’ of thanatos (“death”), the present text has zoe makraiön as equivalent to athanatos bios (“immortal, lit. deathless, life”).

"Long aioned life" is another paraphrase from the LXX.

ClementofA · Nov 13, 2017

Der Alter said:
Gladly. Here from your link

It is when Philo concentrates on that which comes closest to God that he starts speaking of aion. Just as in Mut. 267 [91. aion is preceded and introduced by “the archetype and paradigm of time”. Philo concludes that “in aion nothing is past nor will be future. but it is only in a present state”.
Don't you just hate it when one of your out-of-context references proves you wrong?

Wrong about what? What page of the linked book by Keizer is this alleged quote on? Is your quote in regards to philosophical classical Greek such as in Plato or Aristotle? Does Scripture - ever - use aion/ios in that sense? No. Therefore your quote of Philo is irrelevant to the topic. What is of interest is Philo's usage of the words aion & aionios in regards to everyday common Koine Greek and in the Greek OT of his time (c. 20 BC-50AD).

Der Alter said:
The words "the unlimited aion" are not Philo's but a paraphrase of the LXX. The rest of your irrelevant repetition ignored and omitted. Your own source, from which the "unlimited aion" is quoted in Philo's own words “in aion nothing is past nor will be future. but it is only in a present state.” p.224
Life Time Entirety. A Study of AION in Greek Literature and Philosophy, the Septuagint and Philo

Page 212 says "... "the unlimited aion" is Philo's paraphrase..."

Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

Der Alter said:
Perhaps you should refrain from copy/pasting everything from tents-r-us and do your own research. Just saying.
ETA:As for Philo's "long aioned" I found this on p. 242 of Keizer

Der Alter said:
Just as in text [24]. it is in connection to a quotation from the Pentateuch which speaks of- to live (this time Deut 4:4, for which see also text [5]). that Philo speaks here of the life par excellence—which he now calls “long-aioned life'. (meaning). The element "long” in the latter term obviously does not have the implication of “but not everlasting”. since an equivalent term is immortal life’ (see the last line).’ Thus zoe makraion appears to be synonymous with zöë aionios: where text [24] speaks of zöë aiönios as the contrary’ of thanatos (“death”), the present text has zoe makraiön as equivalent to athanatos bios (“immortal, lit. deathless, life”).
"Long aioned life" is another paraphrase from the LXX.

Your own quote above says:

"Philo speaks here of the life par excellence—which he now calls “long-aioned life'."

Are you saying Philo didn't write "long-aioned life"?

Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell

Scholar's Corner: The Center for Bible studies in Christian Universalism

Der Alte · Nov 13, 2017

ClementofA said:
Wrong about what? What page of the linked book by Keizer is this alleged quote on? Is your quote in regards to philosophical classical Greek such as in Plato or Aristotle? Does Scripture - ever - use aion/ios in that sense? No. Therefore your quote of Philo is irrelevant to the topic. What is of interest is Philo's usage of the words aion & aionios in regards to everyday common Koine Greek and in the Greek OT of his time (c. 20 BC-50AD).

Your response is irrelevant! From Keizer, your link, pg no. included.

It is when Philo concentrates on that which comes closest to God that he starts speaking of aion. Just as in Mut. 267 [91. aion is preceded and introduced by “the archetype and paradigm of time”. Philo concludes that “in aion nothing is past nor will be future. but it is only in a present state”. Together with Fug. 57 (5), this statement about aion is quoted by scholars as evidence of Philo's familiarity with the conception or 'non-durational eternity'. But it is indicative of the elusiveness of the subject that another interpretation takes aion, when it is related in Philo to the intelligible realm, precisely to mean duration’. In my view, the point at issue in our passage is that “in aion” everything is 'present', which means that nothing is unseen or unsure or ‘in the shadow’ (Deuss 30: “things future lie in the shadow...”). Chapter II has shown that aion carried the notion of life-seen/overseeable-as-a-whole. p. 224

Page 212 says "... "the unlimited aion" is Philo's paraphrase..."
Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?
Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.
Your own quote above says:
"Philo speaks here of the life par excellence

—which he now calls “long-aioned life'."
Are you saying Philo didn't write "long-aioned life"?
Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.
Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Is this how Universalism works, keep endlessly quoting bits and piece out-of-context and ignore when those bits and pieces are proven to be wrong? Everything you are arguing here was addressed and refuted in my previous post which you quoted.

(vi) ln his extant writings, Philo never uses the word aion in plural. The meaning of aion as Philo uses it can be described as “all the whole time.” P. 208
The meaning of aionios in Philo can be described as time-enduring’ and/or lmmortal’ p. 209
Life Time Entirety. A Study of AION in Greek Literature and Philosophy, the Septuagint and Philo
(use) Ton apeiron aiôna, the unlimited aiön”, is Philo's paraphrase of the more-than-aion expression in Exod. 15:18 describing God's kingship. Before Philo. ton apeiron aiona is attested only once, in a fragment from Aristotle where it has the (non-philosophical) sense of “all. endless, time” (Chapter II text [33]). (meaning) The present passage appears to use the phrase in the same sense, while emphasizing the notion of continuity by the words “not for one moment ungoverned” and "uninterrupted”. (context) In Philo’s rewording of Exod.15: 18, God's kingship is his reign over the human soul. P.212

ClementofA · Nov 13, 2017

Der Alter said:
Your response is irrelevant!

What's irrelevant about it? Also you didn't answer my questions:

Wrong about what? Is your quote in regards to philosophical classical Greek such as in Plato or Aristotle? Does Scripture - ever - use aion/ios in that sense? No. Therefore your quote of Philo is irrelevant to the topic. What is of interest is Philo's usage of the words aion & aionios in regards to everyday common Koine Greek and in the Greek OT of his time (c. 20 BC-50AD). Which leads us to passages where he is commenting upon passages in the Old Testament:

Der Alter said:
Is this how Universalism works, keep endlessly quoting bits and piece out-of-context and ignore when those bits and pieces are proven to be wrong? Everything you are arguing here was addressed and refuted in my previous post which you quoted.

What was refuted? You were wrong in saying:

Der Alter said:
The words "the unlimited aion" are not Philo's but a paraphrase of the LXX. The rest of your irrelevant repetition ignored and omitted.

Contrary to your statement above, the words "unlimited aion" are in fact Philo's:

Page 212 says "... "the unlimited aion" is Philo's paraphrase..."

Life Time Entirety. A Study of AION in Greek Literature and Philosophy, the Septuagint and Philo

Evidently you made the same error re Philo writing about "long aioned life":

Der Alter said:
Perhaps you should refrain from copy/pasting everything from tents-r-us and do your own research. Just saying.

[snip]

"Long aioned life" is another paraphrase from the LXX.

Therefore i continue to state the following, which is the subject under consideration:

Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Unique Proof For Christian, Biblical Universalism

Universalism – The Truth Shall Make You Free

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell

Der Alte · Nov 13, 2017

ClementofA said:
What's irrelevant about it? Also you didn't answer my questions:
Wrong about what? Is your quote in regards to philosophical classical Greek such as in Plato or Aristotle? Does Scripture - ever - use aion/ios in that sense? No. Therefore your quote of Philo is irrelevant to the topic. What is of interest is Philo's usage of the words aion & aionios in regards to everyday common Koine Greek and in the Greek OT of his time (c. 20 BC-50AD). Which leads us to passages where he is commenting upon passages in the Old Testament:

You don't know what Philo's usage of any words are. You have repeatedly refused to read the entire quote in-context and keep repeating the same argument over and over. What is this "philosophical classical Greek" nonsense?

What was refuted? You were wrong in saying:

How can what I posted be wrong when I quoted Keizer exactly? This is a very sneaky dodge when your own source proves you wrong.

Contrary to your statement above, the words "unlimited aion" are in fact Philo's:
Page 212 says "... "the unlimited aion" is Philo's paraphrase..."

Showing once again you refuse to read the entire quote in-context only quoting three words words.
Here is the quote in-context again. See if you can force yourself to read and understand all 90+ words

(use) Ton apeiron aiôna, the unlimited aiön”, is Philo's paraphrase of the more-than-aion expression in Exod. 15:18 describing God's kingship. Before Philo. ton apeiron aiona is attested only once, in a fragment from Aristotle where it has the (non-philosophical) sense of “all. endless, time” (Chapter II text [33]). (meaning) The present passage appears to use the phrase in the same sense, while emphasizing the notion of continuity by the words “not for one moment ungoverned” and "uninterrupted”. (context) In Philo’s rewording of Exod.15: 18, God's kingship is his reign over the human soul. P.212

Please note the author is directing the reader to the context, which you continue to ignore. If you ignore the context then you are misquoting and misrepresenting the author.
Life Time Entirety. A Study of AION in Greek Literature and Philosophy, the Septuagint and Philo

Evidently you made the same error re Philo writing about "long aioned life":
Therefore i continue to state the following, which is the subject under consideration:
Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

(use) Just as in text 1241. it is in connection to a quotation from the Pentateuch which speaks of ”to live” (this time Deut.4:4, for which see also text [5]). that Philo speaks here of the life parexcellence—which he [Philo] now calls long-aiöned life”. (meaning) The element "long” in the latter term obviously does not have the implication of “but not everlasting'. since an equivalent term is “immortal life” (see the last line).’4’ Thus zoe makraion appears to be synonymous with zöë aiönios” where text [241 speaks of zöë aiónios as the contrary of thanatos (“death”), the present text has zöë makraiôn as equivalent to athanatos. bios (“immortal, lit. deathless, life”).Keizer p.242

Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Repeating the same two words "unlimited aion" over and over again while ignoring the context is a gross misrepresentation of Keizer and Philo see quote from Keizer p. 212 above.

ClementofA · Nov 13, 2017

Der Alter said:
How can what I posted be wrong when I quoted Keizer exactly? This is a very sneaky dodge when your own source proves you wrong.

Keizer doesn't say what you falsely said here:

Der Alter said:
The words "the unlimited aion" are not Philo's but a paraphrase of the LXX. The rest of your irrelevant repetition ignored and omitted.

You are wrong. Contrary to your statement above, the words "unlimited aion" are in fact Philo's:

Page 212 says "... "the unlimited aion" is Philo's paraphrase..."

Life Time Entirety. A Study of AION in Greek Literature and Philosophy, the Septuagint and Philo

Der Alter said:
Showing once again you refuse to read the entire quote in-context only quoting three words words.
Here is the quote in-context again. See if you can force yourself to read and understand all 90+ words
(use) Ton apeiron aiôna, the unlimited aiön”, is Philo's paraphrase of the more-than-aion expression in Exod. 15:18 describing God's kingship. Before Philo. ton apeiron aiona is attested only once, in a fragment from Aristotle where it has the (non-philosophical) sense of “all. endless, time” (Chapter II text [33]). (meaning) The present passage appears to use the phrase in the same sense, while emphasizing the notion of continuity by the words “not for one moment ungoverned” and "uninterrupted”. (context) In Philo’s rewording of Exod.15: 18, God's kingship is his reign over the human soul. P.212
Please note the author is directing the reader to the context, which you continue to ignore. If you ignore the context then you are misquoting and misrepresenting the author.

Which supports what i just said above. The words "unlimited aion" are Philo's words. Not, as you erroneously declared, "not Philo's" words.

Evidently you made the same error re Philo writing about "long aioned life":

Der Alter said:
Perhaps you should refrain from copy/pasting everything from tents-r-us and do your own research. Just saying.

[snip]

"Long aioned life" is another paraphrase from the LXX.

Therefore i continue to state the following, which is the subject under consideration:

Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?

Der Alter said:
(use) Just as in text 1241. it is in connection to a quotation from the Pentateuch which speaks of ”to live” (this time Deut.4:4, for which see also text [5]). that Philo speaks here of the life parexcellence—which he [Philo] now calls long-aiöned life”. (meaning) The element "long” in the latter term obviously does not have the implication of “but not everlasting'. since an equivalent term is “immortal life” (see the last line).’4’ Thus zoe makraion appears to be synonymous with zöë aiönios” where text [241 speaks of zöë aiónios as the contrary of thanatos (“death”), the present text has zöë makraiôn as equivalent to athanatos. bios (“immortal, lit. deathless, life”).Keizer p.242

Repeating the same two words "unlimited aion" over and over again while ignoring the context is a gross misrepresentation of Keizer and Philo see quote from Keizer p. 212 above.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Do you have no answer to this:

Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal.

>Believers and Supporters of Christian Universalism

Der Alte · Nov 14, 2017

ClementofA said:
Keizer doesn't say what you falsely said here:
You are wrong. Contrary to your statement above, the words "unlimited aion" are in fact Philo's:
Page 212 says "... "the unlimited aion" is Philo's paraphrase..."
Life Time Entirety. A Study of AION in Greek Literature and Philosophy, the Septuagint and Philo
Which supports what i just said above. The words "unlimited aion" are Philo's words. Not, as you erroneously declared, "not Philo's" words.
Evidently you made the same error re Philo writing about "long aioned life":
Therefore i continue to state the following, which is the subject under consideration:
Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.
Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal?
I have no idea what you're talking about. Do you have no answer to this:
Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.
Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal.

You have summed up the false teaching of Universalism very well. You quote 2-3 words out-of-context and when your own source disproves your assumptions/presuppositions you simply ignore it and keep repeating the same argument over and over as if endless repetition will make it true.

It is when Philo concentrates on that which comes closest to God that he starts speaking of aion. Just as in Mut. 267 [91. aion is preceded and introduced by “the archetype and paradigm of time”. Philo concludes that “in aion [without any other words. DA] nothing is past nor will be future. but it is only in a present state”.
Philo's point in our passage is not to develop a notion of. e.g., 'atemporal eternity’ but to stress that “in aion” there is no change. All the farther, so he argues. must God, who is above aion be from change. Keizer p. 225.
(use) Just as in text 1241. it is in connection to a quotation from the Pentateuch which speaks of ”to live” (this time Deut.4:4, for which see also text [5]). that Philo speaks here of the life parexcellence—which he now calls long-aiöned life”. (meaning) The element "long” in the latter term obviously does not have the implication of “but not everlasting'. since an equivalent term [of long-aioned life] is “immortal life” (see the last line).’4’ Thus zoe makraion appears to be synonymous with zöë aiönios” where text [241 speaks of zöë aiónios [without any other supporting words. DA] as the contrary of thanatos (“death”), the present text has zöë makraiôn as equivalent to athanatos. bios (“immortal, lit. deathless, life”). [Keizer p. 242]

ClementofA · Nov 14, 2017

Der Alter said:
You have summed up the false teaching of Universalism very well. You quote 2-3 words out-of-context and when your own source disproves your assumptions/presuppositions you simply ignore it and keep repeating the same argument over and over as if endless repetition will make it true.

In your mind only. It's one thing to say it, another to prove it. Just saying it & quoting something while acting like the quote said anything to support your statement does not prove it. It doesn't even provide an explanation in your own words supporting your claim. That you have failed to do. As you have failed to explain, answer or disprove this:

Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.

Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal.

Your quote is in harmony with what i've been saying all along.

Furthermore, though you haven't admitted it yet, you made the errors of a novice, as follows:

Keizer doesn't say what you falsely said here:

Der Alter said:
The words "the unlimited aion" are not Philo's but a paraphrase of the LXX. The rest of your irrelevant repetition ignored and omitted.

You are wrong. Contrary to your statement above, the words "unlimited aion" are in fact Philo's:

Page 212 says "... "the unlimited aion" is Philo's paraphrase..."

Life Time Entirety. A Study of AION in Greek Literature and Philosophy, the Septuagint and Philo

Der Alter said:
Showing once again you refuse to read the entire quote in-context only quoting three words words.
Here is the quote in-context again. See if you can force yourself to read and understand all 90+ words
(use) Ton apeiron aiôna, the unlimited aiön”, is Philo's paraphrase of the more-than-aion expression in Exod. 15:18 describing God's kingship. Before Philo. ton apeiron aiona is attested only once, in a fragment from Aristotle where it has the (non-philosophical) sense of “all. endless, time” (Chapter II text [33]). (meaning) The present passage appears to use the phrase in the same sense, while emphasizing the notion of continuity by the words “not for one moment ungoverned” and "uninterrupted”. (context) In Philo’s rewording of Exod.15: 18, God's kingship is his reign over the human soul. P.212
Please note the author is directing the reader to the context, which you continue to ignore. If you ignore the context then you are misquoting and misrepresenting the author.

Which supports what i just said above. The words "unlimited aion" are Philo's words. Not, as you erroneously declared, "not Philo's" words.

Evidently you made the same error re Philo writing about "long aioned life":

Der Alter said:
Perhaps you should refrain from copy/pasting everything from tents-r-us and do your own research. Just saying.

[snip]

"Long aioned life" is another paraphrase from the LXX.

Der Alte · Nov 15, 2017

ClementofA said:
In your mind only. It's one thing to say it, another to prove it. Just saying it & quoting something while acting like the quote said anything to support your statement does not prove it. It doesn't even provide an explanation in your own words supporting your claim. That you have failed to do. As you have failed to explain, answer or disprove this:
Philo speaks in four passages of a "long aion". Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Obviously not.
Philo, at the time of Christ, also spoke of an unlimited aion. Does that mean the word aion is defined as "eternal"? Or does it mean aion needed another word meaning eternal added to it to make it eternal because the word aion, in and of itself, does not mean eternal.
Your quote is in harmony with what i've been saying all along.
Furthermore, though you haven't admitted it yet, you made the errors of a novice, as follows:
Keizer doesn't say what you falsely said here:
You are wrong. Contrary to your statement above, the words "unlimited aion" are in fact Philo's:
Page 212 says "... "the unlimited aion" is Philo's paraphrase..."
Which supports what i just said above. The words "unlimited aion" are Philo's words. Not, as you erroneously declared, "not Philo's" words.
Evidently you made the same error re Philo writing about "long aioned life":

Demonstrates how bankrupt the universalist teaching is. Repeating the same arguments over and over and over while ignoring everything I quoted from your source.

ClementofA · Nov 15, 2017

Der Alter said:
Demonstrates how bankrupt the universalist teaching is. Repeating the same arguments over and over and over while ignoring everything I quoted from your source.

I didn't ignore it. I said the quotes support what i said & the fact you were wrong, as i documented. Why deny the obvious.

ClementofA · Nov 17, 2017

Der Alter said:
Now there is a logical fallacy an argument from silence. I must be wrong because you don't know of any source which disagrees with me. Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.

No such argument was stated saying you "must be wrong", though what are the odds that you are right when you cannot produce a single lexicon, church father, commentator or any other source supporting your view? We've both read many of these sources over several decades & i've never seen your argument presented by anyone, even in many forum debates re the words aion & aionion. Lexicons disagree with your view. And if you were aware of any source supporting your view, you'ld have posted it. All of this evidence combined together speaks volumes. In a court of law it would be a slam dunk. Your chance of winning would be like winning a 50 million dollar lottery.

Who agrees with you that when Scripture repeatedly speaks of the "end of the age" (e.g. Mt. 24:3) it is not a literal use of aion and is being used as hyperbole (an exaggerated statement not meant to be taken literally) like references to Herod being a fox or Peter a stone? No lexicon, church father, commentator or forum poster in the past 2000 years has been cited in support of your theory. Except you, yourself & you. It is Der Alter against the world & history of 2000 years. Does anyone agree with your ridiculous theory?

The Scriptural references to the "end of the age"[aion] prove that aion literally is used of, & can mean, a finite period of time that ends, an age, eon, a duration of time, an epoch. As i defined the word (and lexicons agree):

"Aion literally means age, eon. It refers to a duration of time, often an epoch."

Which you said was wrong.

When some duration of time has an "end" it is not endless, but finite. So when aion is in apposition to "end", it is therefore opposed to being endless & cannot mean eternal.

So your view that olam & aion & aionios mean eternal everywhere in the Scriptures (except when used in hyperbole) is proven to be wrong.

Those words often literally refer to, mean & are defined as a finite duration of time, whether of an age, eon, epoch, lifetime, etc. Both lexicons and Scriptural usage concur.

AIÓN -- AIÓNIOS
The Greek Words "aion" and "aionios," do these words mean "eternal" or "everlasting"?

ClementofA · Nov 19, 2017

Lamentations 3:22 and 3:31-33, The steadfast love of the Lord NEVER ceases, his mercies NEVER come to an end. . . .
Lam.3:31 For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:
32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the SONS OF MEN.…

Der Alte · Nov 20, 2017

ClementofA said:
Lamentations 3:22 and 3:31-33, The steadfast love of the Lord NEVER ceases, his mercies NEVER come to an end. . . .
Lam.3:31 For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:
32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the SONS OF MEN.…

The usual heterodox out-of-context proof text. Let us read a little more of the context. There is a condition for God's loving kindness and compassion.

Lamentations 3:39
(39) Wherefore doth a living man complain, a man for the punishment of his sins?
Lamentations 3:41-42
(41) Let us lift up our heart with our hands unto God in the heavens.
(42) We have transgressed and have rebelled: thou hast not pardoned.
Lamentations 3:55-57
(55) I called upon thy name, O LORD, out of the low dungeon.
(56) Thou hast heard my voice: hide not thine ear at my breathing, at my cry.
(57) Thou drewest near in the day that I called upon thee: thou saidst, Fear not.

ClementofA · Nov 20, 2017

Der Alter said:
The usual heterodox out-of-context proof text. Let us read a little more of the context. There is a condition for God's loving kindness and compassion.

Lamentations 3:39
(39) Wherefore doth a living man complain, a man for the punishment of his sins?
Lamentations 3:41-42
(41) Let us lift up our heart with our hands unto God in the heavens.
(42) We have transgressed and have rebelled: thou hast not pardoned.
Lamentations 3:55-57
(55) I called upon thy name, O LORD, out of the low dungeon.
(56) Thou hast heard my voice: hide not thine ear at my breathing, at my cry.
(57) Thou drewest near in the day that I called upon thee: thou saidst, Fear not.

Perhaps you meant to say there is a condition for - recieving - God's loving kindness & compassion. Who denies that? Yet it does not change the facts stated:

Lamentations 3:22 and 3:31-33, The steadfast love of the Lord NEVER ceases, his mercies NEVER come to an end. . . .
Lam.3:31 For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:
32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the SONS OF MEN.…

Christian universalism--Ultimate Reconcilation: The True "Good News" Gospel of the Bible

Der Alte · Nov 20, 2017

ClementofA said:
Perhaps you meant to say there is a condition for - recieving - God's loving kindness & compassion. Who denies that? Yet it does not change the facts stated:
Lamentations 3:22 and 3:31-33, The steadfast love of the Lord NEVER ceases, his mercies NEVER come to an end. . . .
Lam.3:31 For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:
32 For if He causes grief, Then He will have compassion According to His abundant lovingkindness. 33 For He does not afflict willingly Or grieve the SONS OF MEN.…

As with all your arguments it is false because you insist on quoting 1-2 verses out-of-context. What, according to Universalism, happens when a person(s) do not call upon on the Lord.

Lamentations 3:61-65
(61) LORD, you have heard their insults, all their plots against me—
(62) what my enemies whisper and mutter against me all day long.
(63) Look at them! Sitting or standing, they mock me in their songs.
(64) Pay them back what they deserve, LORD, for what their hands have done.
(65) Put a veil over their hearts, and may your curse be on them!

Once again see my example. The Bible says, "There is no God."

Psalms 14:1
(1) For the director of music. Of David. The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good.
Psalms 53:1
(1) For the director of music. According to mahalath. A maskil of David. The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, and their ways are vile; there is no one who does good.

Der Alte · Nov 20, 2017

ClementofA said:
I didn't ignore it. I said the quotes support what i said & the fact you were wrong, as i documented. Why deny the obvious.

Saying that your source, which I quoted in context, supported what you said, does not make it so. Show how what I highlighted supports your argument?

Conditional Immortality Supports Annihilationion, Refutes Eternal Conscious Torment and Universalism

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Messianic

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Similar threads