- Jun 1, 2017
- 893
- 744
- 59
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Note: The numbering of the points continues from parts 1 and 2, so that everything is this section is 3.something.
3.1 Review
Universalists believe that no one will be punished or destroyed eternally, but rather that everyone will eventually be redeemed and live joyfully in God’s eternal Kingdom. Two of the most difficult texts for the Universalist view use the Greek word aionios. In all widely used English translations, aionios is translated as either “eternal” or “everlasting” in these two verses. It will be easy to see why, if this translation is correct, these verses are fatal to the Universalist position:
I part 1 we looked at evidence from the 71 uses of aionios in the New Testament. I concluded that the evidence strongly supports aionios meaning “eternal” in the literal sense of “eternal” whenever it is looking forward in time.
In part 2 I examined an argument which is commonly seen in popular Universalist writings but which some Universalists avoid. This argument basically says that since the adjective aionios is derived from the noun aion and since aion means “an age”, then aionios must mean “lasting for an age.” I explained that this argument is doubly wrong. It commits the etymological fallacy of determining the meaning of a word from its roots rather than from its usage. Further, since aion as used in the New Testament most commonly refers to a future eternal age, even using their wrong methodology, the most likely meaning for aionios when referring to things in the coming age would be “eternal”.
I want to remind my readers that I am intentionally interacting with a specific type of Universalist here. I am interacting with Universalists who believe that salvation comes through faith in Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, and who believe the Bible is our authority when it comes to our theology. While I don’t agree with these Universalists that everyone will live eternally, I have no reason to doubt that they themselves will live eternally and I look forward to worshiping before the throne with them where all our disputes will be melted away by God’s glory and presence. In the meantime, while these issue need not divide us, they are, in my opinion, important enough to study and even debate.
3.2 Universalist Arguments about Aionios based on the Old Testament
The Old Testament was written in Hebrew. However, before Jesus was born and long before the New Testament was written, the Old Testament was translated into Greek. The most important translation into Greek is called the Septuagint and is translated LXX (the Roman numeral for seventy, because according to tradition seventy scholars produced the translation). The LXX is extremely valuable. The authors of the New Testament appear to frequently quote from it or allude to it. It provides a helpful linguistic link between words and related concepts in the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament. It is entirely legitimate to look at data in the LXX to help understand how words are used in the New Testament. I frequently (almost weekly, when preparing to teach, preach, write, or just studying God’s word) look at examples in the LXX myself. So I respect this approach. It is not the basic idea of looking at the LXX for data which I find problematic, but rather the specific Universalist analysis of that data with respect to the meaning of aionios in the New Testament.
Before examing two types of Univeralist arguments from the Old Testament, a more general comment is in order. Words change meaning over time. Think about how the meaning of the word gay has changed. If you read the King James Bible or Shakespeare, you can find many words which have changed their meaning. Also, words can be used differently in different locations and even to some extent by different authors in the same location. The LXX is significantly removed from the New Testament in time, in geographical location of its compostion, and it obviously has different authors. This does not make the LXX irrelevant. It does mean that data from the New Testament itself is FAR more valuable in determining the meaning of a New Testament word than data from the LXX. That’s why I began this series by looking at the data in the New Testament itself. The New Testament data alone is enough, in my opinion, to establish the meaning of aionios as eternal when looking forward in time. Nevertheless, it is not wrong to also look at data from the LXX, so let’s press on. I’m convinced that when properly evaluated the LXX actually backs up the range of meaning for aionios which we found it part 1 by looking at the New Testment data. We’ll look at two related arguments. I look at what I view as the weaker of the arguments first.
3.3.1 Some Universalists Argue or at Least Imply that Since Aionios Translates the Hebrew Word Olam, it Does Not Mean Eternal
The Greek word aionios is used 115 times in the LXX. With just a few exceptions it always translates the Hebrew word olam. Olam is a Hebrew adjective which describes things which last for a long time or which come to us from a long time back in the past. With regard to future time, olam sometimes refers to things which last forever, and sometimes refers to things which last for a long, but limited time into the future. The range of meaning of olam may be represented as follows:
Some Universalists seem to assume that because aionios is used to translate olam in the LXX it must have the same range of meaning. But words in different languages rarely have identical ranges of meaning. Let me share an easy to undertand example between the two languages I’m fluent in: Indonesian and English. Then we’ll get back to olam and aionios.
Consider the very simple English word “rice”. We use this English word to refer to rice which has been cooked and is ready to eat, or rice which is in a bag in the grocery store, or rice which is in a field waiting to be harvested. If you were ordering rice in an Indonesian restaurant you would translate “rice” with the Indonesian word nasi. However, it would be a mistake to think that nasi has the same range of meaning as rice. If you were looking for bags of rice in an Indonesian grocery store and asked for nasi, your Indonesian friend might restrain from laughing out of politeness, but they would at least smile and hopefully explain your mistake. Uncooked rice is not called nasi, it is called beras. And rice waiting to be harvested in a field in neither nasi nor beras, it is padi. The range of meaning of rice and nasi may be illustrated like this:
Based on our study of aionios in the New Testament (in part 1), it should be considered at least possible that the range of meaning of olam and aionios overlap but are not identical, like this:
Before we conclude that the above comparison is accurate, we need to consider what may be the least weak Universalist argument in favor of aionios meaning, at least sometimes, “continuing into the future for a limited age”.
3.3.2 Some Universalist Argue that Examples of Aionios in the LXX Referring to Things or Situations which are Not Eternal Prove that Aionios does not Mean Eternal
As already mentioned, aionios occurs 115 times in the LXX.
When looking into the past, aionios generally is used in the LXX to mean “ancient”. Here are two examples:
There are many examples where aionios is used to refer to things which clearly are, in fact, eternal. Here are two examples:
However, aionios is also used to translate olam when referring to things which will last a long time into the future, but will not last forever. Here are two of many similar examples:
In the first example, the oil in the lamps did not in fact burn forever. The laws which governed the temple worship in Leviticus were fulfilled and superseded by the new covenant established by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In the second case, after Israel was defeated it may have been a place of horror for a very long time, but certainly not for eternity.
These examples at first may seem to decisively demonstrate that at the time the LXX was written aionios could refer to something lasting a long time into the future which was not eternal. But I’m not convinced that is true for two closely related reasons.
1. The LXX is a translation. Unlike the original Scriptures, it is not perfect. In most of the cases where the translators used aionios to refer to things which we know did not last forever, they might have reasonably thought that those things would, in fact, last forever. This is likely true for the laws related to the temple worship and Old Testament priesthood. Even when those activities were interrupted, there was likely an expectation that they would be resumed and continued forever. Several generations before Christ was born it is unlikely that the LXX translators had a clear understanding that a new, truly eternal, priesthood would be established by Christ. Thus, they reasonably chose aionios to translate olam in cases in which it appeared to them that aionios was referring to something eternal. This accounts for almost all the cases in the LXX where ainios refers to something which did not turn out to be eternal.
2. It is also a fact that a very common translation error is to get into the habit of using one word to translate another in many places where it fits and then to somewhat carelessly use it in places where it is not the best choice. Many foreigners who have moved to Indonesia have learned that nasi means rice, but then wrongly asked where the nasi is in a grocery story, when they should have asked where the beras is. Because I lived in Indonesia for 14 years and very often read and heard Indonesian translated into English and vice versa, I can say with confidence that this category of translation error is very common in all types of settings. So it is possible that because aionios very often was the best choice to translate olam (when it referred to something ancient or something eternal), the translators occasionally made a poor choice and translated olam as aionios when referring to something which lasted long into the future, but not forever. This may explain the use of aionios in Jeremiah 18:16 above. In fact, for this reason, translated material is generally not the best source for sample sentences for determining the precise range of meaning of words.
The above two factors can easily account for all the uses of aionios in the LXX to refer to things which last a long time into the future, but not forever. Most examples fall into the first category of things which the translators may have reasonably thought were eternal. The few remaining examples (and there really are very few) may be accounted for by the second factor.
3.4 Conclusion
The data in the LXX strongly supports aionios meaning either ancient (looking back in time) or eternal (looking forward in time). The evidence for aionios meaning “lasting for a long but limited time” is weak due to the nature of translation between olam and aionios. At most, the data in the LXX might possibly show that in a time and place significantly removed from the New Testament authors, aionios could refer to things that lasted a long time, but not forever. I personally do not feel the data in the LXX justifies even that conclusion. But even if it does, the data in the New Testament itself is far more important. As we saw in part 1, the New Testament data consistently shows, with clear examples, that when looking into the future aionios means eternal.
This was originally a post on my blog.
3.1 Review
Universalists believe that no one will be punished or destroyed eternally, but rather that everyone will eventually be redeemed and live joyfully in God’s eternal Kingdom. Two of the most difficult texts for the Universalist view use the Greek word aionios. In all widely used English translations, aionios is translated as either “eternal” or “everlasting” in these two verses. It will be easy to see why, if this translation is correct, these verses are fatal to the Universalist position:
CSB Matthew 25:46 "And they will go away into eternal (aionios) punishment, but the righteous into eternal (aionios) life."
CSB 2 Thessalonians 1:9 These will pay the penalty of eternal (aionios) destruction from the Lord's presence and from His glorious strength
Universalists often respond by arguing that aionios does not mean eternal in these verses. They often argue for a meaing like “lasting for an age”.CSB 2 Thessalonians 1:9 These will pay the penalty of eternal (aionios) destruction from the Lord's presence and from His glorious strength
I part 1 we looked at evidence from the 71 uses of aionios in the New Testament. I concluded that the evidence strongly supports aionios meaning “eternal” in the literal sense of “eternal” whenever it is looking forward in time.
In part 2 I examined an argument which is commonly seen in popular Universalist writings but which some Universalists avoid. This argument basically says that since the adjective aionios is derived from the noun aion and since aion means “an age”, then aionios must mean “lasting for an age.” I explained that this argument is doubly wrong. It commits the etymological fallacy of determining the meaning of a word from its roots rather than from its usage. Further, since aion as used in the New Testament most commonly refers to a future eternal age, even using their wrong methodology, the most likely meaning for aionios when referring to things in the coming age would be “eternal”.
I want to remind my readers that I am intentionally interacting with a specific type of Universalist here. I am interacting with Universalists who believe that salvation comes through faith in Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, and who believe the Bible is our authority when it comes to our theology. While I don’t agree with these Universalists that everyone will live eternally, I have no reason to doubt that they themselves will live eternally and I look forward to worshiping before the throne with them where all our disputes will be melted away by God’s glory and presence. In the meantime, while these issue need not divide us, they are, in my opinion, important enough to study and even debate.
3.2 Universalist Arguments about Aionios based on the Old Testament
The Old Testament was written in Hebrew. However, before Jesus was born and long before the New Testament was written, the Old Testament was translated into Greek. The most important translation into Greek is called the Septuagint and is translated LXX (the Roman numeral for seventy, because according to tradition seventy scholars produced the translation). The LXX is extremely valuable. The authors of the New Testament appear to frequently quote from it or allude to it. It provides a helpful linguistic link between words and related concepts in the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament. It is entirely legitimate to look at data in the LXX to help understand how words are used in the New Testament. I frequently (almost weekly, when preparing to teach, preach, write, or just studying God’s word) look at examples in the LXX myself. So I respect this approach. It is not the basic idea of looking at the LXX for data which I find problematic, but rather the specific Universalist analysis of that data with respect to the meaning of aionios in the New Testament.
Before examing two types of Univeralist arguments from the Old Testament, a more general comment is in order. Words change meaning over time. Think about how the meaning of the word gay has changed. If you read the King James Bible or Shakespeare, you can find many words which have changed their meaning. Also, words can be used differently in different locations and even to some extent by different authors in the same location. The LXX is significantly removed from the New Testament in time, in geographical location of its compostion, and it obviously has different authors. This does not make the LXX irrelevant. It does mean that data from the New Testament itself is FAR more valuable in determining the meaning of a New Testament word than data from the LXX. That’s why I began this series by looking at the data in the New Testament itself. The New Testament data alone is enough, in my opinion, to establish the meaning of aionios as eternal when looking forward in time. Nevertheless, it is not wrong to also look at data from the LXX, so let’s press on. I’m convinced that when properly evaluated the LXX actually backs up the range of meaning for aionios which we found it part 1 by looking at the New Testment data. We’ll look at two related arguments. I look at what I view as the weaker of the arguments first.
3.3.1 Some Universalists Argue or at Least Imply that Since Aionios Translates the Hebrew Word Olam, it Does Not Mean Eternal
The Greek word aionios is used 115 times in the LXX. With just a few exceptions it always translates the Hebrew word olam. Olam is a Hebrew adjective which describes things which last for a long time or which come to us from a long time back in the past. With regard to future time, olam sometimes refers to things which last forever, and sometimes refers to things which last for a long, but limited time into the future. The range of meaning of olam may be represented as follows:
Some Universalists seem to assume that because aionios is used to translate olam in the LXX it must have the same range of meaning. But words in different languages rarely have identical ranges of meaning. Let me share an easy to undertand example between the two languages I’m fluent in: Indonesian and English. Then we’ll get back to olam and aionios.
Consider the very simple English word “rice”. We use this English word to refer to rice which has been cooked and is ready to eat, or rice which is in a bag in the grocery store, or rice which is in a field waiting to be harvested. If you were ordering rice in an Indonesian restaurant you would translate “rice” with the Indonesian word nasi. However, it would be a mistake to think that nasi has the same range of meaning as rice. If you were looking for bags of rice in an Indonesian grocery store and asked for nasi, your Indonesian friend might restrain from laughing out of politeness, but they would at least smile and hopefully explain your mistake. Uncooked rice is not called nasi, it is called beras. And rice waiting to be harvested in a field in neither nasi nor beras, it is padi. The range of meaning of rice and nasi may be illustrated like this:
Based on our study of aionios in the New Testament (in part 1), it should be considered at least possible that the range of meaning of olam and aionios overlap but are not identical, like this:
Before we conclude that the above comparison is accurate, we need to consider what may be the least weak Universalist argument in favor of aionios meaning, at least sometimes, “continuing into the future for a limited age”.
3.3.2 Some Universalist Argue that Examples of Aionios in the LXX Referring to Things or Situations which are Not Eternal Prove that Aionios does not Mean Eternal
As already mentioned, aionios occurs 115 times in the LXX.
When looking into the past, aionios generally is used in the LXX to mean “ancient”. Here are two examples:
CSB Psalm 77:5 I consider days of old, years long past (aionios).
CSB Isaiah 58:12 Some of you will rebuild the ancient (aionios) ruins; you will restore the foundations laid long ago (aionios); you will be called the repairer of broken walls, the restorer of streets where people live. (Isa. 58:12 CSB)
CSB Isaiah 58:12 Some of you will rebuild the ancient (aionios) ruins; you will restore the foundations laid long ago (aionios); you will be called the repairer of broken walls, the restorer of streets where people live. (Isa. 58:12 CSB)
There are many examples where aionios is used to refer to things which clearly are, in fact, eternal. Here are two examples:
CSB Genesis 21:33 Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beer-sheba, and there he called on the name of Yahweh, the Everlasting (aionios) God.
CSB Daniel 7:14 He was given authority to rule, and glory, and a kingdom; so that those of every people, nation, and language should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting (aionios) dominion that will not pass away, and His kingdom is one that will not be destroyed.
CSB Daniel 7:14 He was given authority to rule, and glory, and a kingdom; so that those of every people, nation, and language should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting (aionios) dominion that will not pass away, and His kingdom is one that will not be destroyed.
However, aionios is also used to translate olam when referring to things which will last a long time into the future, but will not last forever. Here are two of many similar examples:
CSB Exodus 27:21 In the tent of meeting outside the veil that is in front of the testimony, Aaron and his sons are to tend the lamp from evening until morning before the LORD. This is to be a permanent (aionios) statute for the Israelites throughout their generations.
CSB Jeremiah 18:16 They have made their land a horror, a perpetual (aionios) object of scorn; everyone who passes by it will be horrified and shake his head.
CSB Jeremiah 18:16 They have made their land a horror, a perpetual (aionios) object of scorn; everyone who passes by it will be horrified and shake his head.
In the first example, the oil in the lamps did not in fact burn forever. The laws which governed the temple worship in Leviticus were fulfilled and superseded by the new covenant established by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In the second case, after Israel was defeated it may have been a place of horror for a very long time, but certainly not for eternity.
These examples at first may seem to decisively demonstrate that at the time the LXX was written aionios could refer to something lasting a long time into the future which was not eternal. But I’m not convinced that is true for two closely related reasons.
1. The LXX is a translation. Unlike the original Scriptures, it is not perfect. In most of the cases where the translators used aionios to refer to things which we know did not last forever, they might have reasonably thought that those things would, in fact, last forever. This is likely true for the laws related to the temple worship and Old Testament priesthood. Even when those activities were interrupted, there was likely an expectation that they would be resumed and continued forever. Several generations before Christ was born it is unlikely that the LXX translators had a clear understanding that a new, truly eternal, priesthood would be established by Christ. Thus, they reasonably chose aionios to translate olam in cases in which it appeared to them that aionios was referring to something eternal. This accounts for almost all the cases in the LXX where ainios refers to something which did not turn out to be eternal.
2. It is also a fact that a very common translation error is to get into the habit of using one word to translate another in many places where it fits and then to somewhat carelessly use it in places where it is not the best choice. Many foreigners who have moved to Indonesia have learned that nasi means rice, but then wrongly asked where the nasi is in a grocery story, when they should have asked where the beras is. Because I lived in Indonesia for 14 years and very often read and heard Indonesian translated into English and vice versa, I can say with confidence that this category of translation error is very common in all types of settings. So it is possible that because aionios very often was the best choice to translate olam (when it referred to something ancient or something eternal), the translators occasionally made a poor choice and translated olam as aionios when referring to something which lasted long into the future, but not forever. This may explain the use of aionios in Jeremiah 18:16 above. In fact, for this reason, translated material is generally not the best source for sample sentences for determining the precise range of meaning of words.
The above two factors can easily account for all the uses of aionios in the LXX to refer to things which last a long time into the future, but not forever. Most examples fall into the first category of things which the translators may have reasonably thought were eternal. The few remaining examples (and there really are very few) may be accounted for by the second factor.
3.4 Conclusion
The data in the LXX strongly supports aionios meaning either ancient (looking back in time) or eternal (looking forward in time). The evidence for aionios meaning “lasting for a long but limited time” is weak due to the nature of translation between olam and aionios. At most, the data in the LXX might possibly show that in a time and place significantly removed from the New Testament authors, aionios could refer to things that lasted a long time, but not forever. I personally do not feel the data in the LXX justifies even that conclusion. But even if it does, the data in the New Testament itself is far more important. As we saw in part 1, the New Testament data consistently shows, with clear examples, that when looking into the future aionios means eternal.
This was originally a post on my blog.
