Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

ClementofA · Jan 20, 2018

Der Alter said:
Irrelevant! Origen quoted "a fountain of water within himself which leaps into eternal life" from John 4:14 ten (10) times and never once mentioned believers leaping anywhere. I know how URists interpret everything out-of-context trying to make it support UR but how did 2nd-3rd century Christians understand the words of Origen?
.....They didn't have a PC sitting in front of them with a list of proof texts and all the stuff you linked to in the above post. Since Origen never said that the fountain leaping represented believers supposedly leaping into the father they had to understand Origen based on the literal sense of the words written.

Irrelevant. The fountain/well of life is in the believers:

John 7:38-39
"He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of LIVING water.'" But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

John 4:14
but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to aionion LIFE."

Why would Origen speak of such nonsense as an inanimate fountain leaping "after eternal life" into "the Father who is beyond eternal life"? In context Origen is speaking about "life":

(19) "And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life but he who is greater than Christ is greater than life."

My position makes way more sense than yours. Your opinion is that Origen was speaking about an "inanimate fountain" leaping "after eternal life" into "the Father who is beyond eternal life". Did Origen forget to use the word "inanimate"? If he meant "inanimate" why didn't he say "inanimate"? Of course the idea that it was "inanimate" is silly.

Moreover, in either case, he still speaks of "after eternal life" & "beyond eternal life". So what is your point? It doesn't negate the finiteness of aionios in those phrases.

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

Der Alte · Jan 20, 2018

ClementofA said:
Yet Scripture never uses that word of the unending punishment of the lost. If Jesus taught unending punishment, surely He would have repeatedly used a word that, you say, "unquestionably means unending. Therefore Jesus didn't teach such a dogma.
Instead, Jesus used a word, aionios, that scholars generally agree is ambiguous, that sometimes refers to duration that is endless & other times refers to duration that is finite & ends.
While Jesus used the ambiguous aionios, the Pharisees used what you say is the unambiguous aidios to describe the punishment of the lost. So in using aionios Jesus rejected the dogma of the Pharisees.
Jesus also warned His disciples re the teachings of the Pharisees.

All irrelevant. "If this" If that" Does not refute anything in my post.

Where did Paul say they are "interchangable"?

This specious question might have some validity if you can show me where any NT writer explained any word they used. Paul used aidios and aionios synonymously.

Romans 1:20
(20) For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal [ἀΐ́διος/aidios] power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Romans 16:26
(26) But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting [αἰώνιος/aionios] God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

In Romans 1:20 Paul refers to God’s power and Godhead as “aidios.” Scholars agree “aidios” unquestionably means eternal, everlasting, unending etc. In Rom 16:26 Paul refers to God as “aionios,” therefore Paul considers “aidios” and “aionios” to be synonymous. If aionios, alone without any other adjectives, did not mean eternal, unending, everlasting etc. he could not have used it synonymously with aiodios as he did.

Many words are applied to God. That doesn't make them all synonymous with each other.

Nonsense and you know it! Of course all adjectives used to describe something are not synonymous. But adjectives which describe the same quality or characteristic can be synonymous. Aidios and aionios refer to duration of time. You claim that aionios always means a finite period.

Context. Romans 1 is speaking about God's attributes. OTOH, Romans 16 refers to times long ago, eonian times past. Context, context, context.
according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past, (Rom.16:25b, NASB)
but has now been brought fully to light, and by the command of the God of the Ages (Rom.16:26a, WEY)
Romans 16:25-26 uses aionios twice. Do you suppose one time it means eternal & the other time it doesn't. Or that it consistently relates to an eon or eons, duration which is often very long, eras, epochs, ages.
of a secret hushed in times eonian, 26 yet manifested now and through prophetic scriptures, according to the injunction of the eonian God (Rom.16:25b-26a, CLV)

I certainly appreciate amateurs trying to explain Greek grammar but I studied with professionals, one of my Greek professors was Roger Omanson, who was on the NIV translation committee. I am no expert but I do know when people who don't know what they are talking about are try to manipulate the text to their own ends.
.....NASB is wrong, WEY is correct, Rom 16:26 reads του αιωνιου θεου, "the aionou God" NOT "the god of the ages" For it to read "God of the ages" it should be written θεος του αιωνιου. θεος in the nominative case not θεου in the genitive case.

"Adolph Deissman gives this account:

The scribbling of one anonymous pagan is not compelling.

Even your beloved JPS translation does not render olam as eternal when applied to God's goings, but as "of old" in Hab.3:6:
He standeth, and shaketh the earth, He beholdeth, and maketh the nations to tremble; And the everlasting mountains are dashed in pieces, The ancient[OLAM] hills do bow; His goings are as of old.[OLAM]" (Hab.3:6, JPS)
The LXX has aionios[166] for olam there in Hab.3:6.

All mildly interesting but irrelevant.

Psalms 37:28
(28) For the LORD loveth judgment, and forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved for ever: [ עולם/olam] but the seed of the wicked shall be cut off.

In this vs. “preserved olam” is contrasted with “the wicked shall be cut off,””age(s),”a finite period, is not opposite of “the wicked shall be cut off,” “for ever” is.

Ecclesiastes 3:14
(14) I know that, whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever:[ עולם] nothing can be put to it, nor any thing taken from it: and God doeth it, that men should fear before him.

In this vs. עולם/olam is equated with. “nothing can be added or taken away” from God's acts. “Age(s),“a finite period, does not equate with “nothing can be added or taken away” from God's acts, “for ever” does.
.....There are 33 similar passages in the OT

Doug Melven · Jan 20, 2018

ClementofA said:
What gives you that idea?

What gives you the idea that anything else be be beyond aionios?
And I am only getting that from Origen's quote.
Isaiah 57:15 says God inhabits eternity. But if someone could be outside of eternity, it could only be God.

ClementofA said:
Irrelevant. The point is the Greek scholar uses aionios of finite duration. And also "life aionios" of finite durayion.

How someone uses a word outside of Scripture is irrelevant.
God determines what we believe. When we start twisting His Words to make them say what we want, we get all kinds of weird doctrines like Mormonism, JW's and Universalism.

ClementofA said:
Who said anything about "doctrine"?

Your entire belief is based on two things. Aionios being finite and your lack of understanding how God could do what He said He would do.

ClementofA said:
That's not what Origen says:

"And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life but he who is greater than Christ is greater than life."

This is only what you think he is saying.
You are clearly taking out of context what he said.

ClementofA said:
Tell that to early church father Chrysostom:

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

Where you put aionios, it should only be aion.
Aion and aionios are not the same words. Aionios comes from aion, but adding the ios to it changes the meaning from age to perpetual.

ClementofA said:
More examples re aion/ios (& olam) being finite:

Strong's definition of aion and aionios.
From G165; perpetual (also used of past time or past and future as well): - eternal for ever everlasting world (began).
From the same as G104; properly an age; by extension perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specifically (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future): - age course eternal (for) ever (-more) [n-]ever (beginning of the while the) world (began without end). Compare G5550

What will be the sign…of the end of the eternity (Mt. 24:3)?This is aion not aionios

¨ I am with you…to the end of the eternity (Mt. 28:20).This is aion not aionios

¨ The sons of this eternity are more shrewd (Lu. 16:8).This is aion not aionios

¨ The sons of this eternity marry (Lu. 20:34).This is aion not aionios

¨ Worthy to attain that eternity (Lu. 20:35).This is aion not aionios

¨ Since the eternity began (Jn. 9:32; Ac. 3:21).This is aion not aionios

¨ Conformed to this eternity (Ro. 12:2).This is aion not aionios

¨ Mystery kept secret since the eternity began but now made manifest (Ro. 16:25-26).
Verse 25 is referring to before the world began.
Verse 26 is referring to God.

¨ Where is the disputer of this eternity (1Co. 1:20)?This is aion not aionios

¨ Wisdom of this eternity, nor of the rulers of this eternity…ordained before the eternities…which none of the rulers of this eternity…(1Co. 2:6-8)This is aion not aionios

¨ Wise in this eternity (1Co. 3:18).This is aion not aionios

¨ Upon whom the ends of the eternities have come.This is aion not aionios
(1Co. 10:11)

¨ God of this eternity has blinded (2Co. 4:4).This is aion not aionios

¨ Deliver us from this present evil eternity (Ga. 1:4).This is aion not aionios

¨ Not only in this eternity but also in that which is to come (Ep. 1:21).This is aion not aionios

¨ Walked according to the eternity of this world (Ep. 2:2).This is aion not aionios

¨ In the eternities to come (Ep. 2:7).This is aion not aionios

¨ From the beginnings of the eternities (Ep. 3:9).This is aion not aionios

¨ Hidden from eternities…but now…revealed (Col. 1:26).This is aion not aionios

¨ Loved this present eternity (2Ti. 4:10).This is aion not aionios

¨ Receive him for eternity (Ph.1:15). Does this mean forever or only until Onesimus dies?
Neither. This is a picture of us.We were lost for awhile, but now that we have returned, we will serve forever.
¨ Powers of the eternity to come He6:5).This is aion not aionios

¨ At the end of the eternities (He. 9:26).This is G2889, kosmos, not age aor eternity.

¨ We understand the eternities have been prepared by a saying of God (He. 11:3).This is aion not aionios

Everything gets changed when you take the time to actually look at the Scripture.

Der Alte · Jan 20, 2018

ClementofA said:
... Moreover, in either case, he still speaks of "after eternal life" & "beyond eternal life". So what is your point? It doesn't negate the finiteness of aionios in those phrases. . .

In the same way the context of Psalms 14:1 and Psalms 53:1 does not negate the fact that both verses say "There is no God." And 2 Kings 5:15 says "there is no God in all the earth" You are not the only one who can quote out-of-context and make a writing say almost anything I want it to.

Universalism | Reasons To Reject Universalism

The False Doctrine of Universalism

Bible Answers: Christian Universal Salvation - THE BIG LIE

1 Tim. 2:4, 2 Pet. 3:9, and Universalism | CARM.org

REFUTING UNIVERSALISM: ARE ALL PEOPLE IN CHRIST?

Der Alte · Jan 20, 2018

ClementofA said:
Begin quote

Irrelevant. The fountain/well of life is in the believers:
...
Why would Origen speak of such nonsense as an inanimate fountain leaping "after eternal life" into "the Father who is beyond eternal life"? In context Origen is speaking about "life":
...
My position makes way more sense than yours. Your opinion is that Origen was speaking about an "inanimate fountain" leaping "after eternal life" into "the Father who is beyond eternal life". Did Origen forget to use the word "inanimate"? If he meant "inanimate" why didn't he say "inanimate"? Of course the idea that it was "inanimate" is silly.
...
Moreover, in either case, he still speaks of "after eternal life" & "beyond eternal life". So what is your point? It doesn't negate the finiteness of aionios in those phrases.

End

Der Alter said:
Begin quote

Is your argument that when Origen. or any other writer. refers to something which is inanimate it is not really inanimate unless the writers says it is? In John 4:14, which Origen quoted 10 times in his John Commentary, what did Jesus say would leap or spring?

John 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

Is a "well of water" animate or inanimate? In Origen's John commentary what did he say would leap or spring?

"(18) For, as there, the bridegroom leaps upon souls that are more noble-natured and divine, called mountains, and skips upon the inferior ones called hills, so here the fountain that appears in the one who drinks of the water that Jesus gives leaps into eternal life.
(19) And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life; but he who is greater than Christ is greater
than life.
(20) When the promise to the one who is blessed because he hungers and thirsts for righteousness is fulfilled, then he who drinks of the water that Jesus will give will have the fountain of water that leaps into eternal life arise within him."

Is a fountain animate or inanimate? You don't like what the scripture or Origen actually says, because it makes more sense to change the words to mean something else.

End

Der Alter said:
Begin quote

Irrelevant! Origen quoted "a fountain of water within himself which leaps into eternal life" from John 4:14 ten (10) times and never once mentioned believers leaping anywhere. I know how URists interpret everything out-of-context trying to make it support UR but how did 2nd-3rd century Christians understand the words of Origen?
.....They didn't have a PC sitting in front of them with a list of proof texts and all the stuff you linked to in the above post. Since Origen never said that the fountain leaping represented believers supposedly leaping into the father they had to understand Origen based on the literal sense of the words written.

End

Universalism | Reasons To Reject Universalism

The False Doctrine of Universalism

Bible Answers: Christian Universal Salvation - THE BIG LIE

1 Tim. 2:4, 2 Pet. 3:9, and Universalism | CARM.org

REFUTING UNIVERSALISM: ARE ALL PEOPLE IN CHRIST?

ClementofA · Jan 20, 2018

Doug Melven said:
How someone uses a word outside of Scripture is irrelevant.

Then why are you spending so much effort arguing against what i've posted re the early church father Greek scholars Origen & Chrysostom? If it's "irrelevant" as you say, that's all you needed to say. Though scholars, lexicographers & Bible translators disagree with you.

Doug Melven said:
Where you put aionios, it should only be aion.

Wrong. Look up the Greek text. The word is aionios, just as i posted it:

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

Aionios is of finite duration above, not eternal.

Doug Melven said:
Aionios comes from aion, but adding the ios to it changes the meaning from age to perpetual.

Find me any Greek scholar who agrees with what you just stated.

What do you think the word "perpetual" means? Here is the 2nd definition from Webster's Dictionary:

"occurring continually : indefinitely long-continued . perpetual problems"

Definition of PERPETUAL

Is the "perpetual" covenant of the Sabbath eternal or finite:

Exodus 31:16 KJV
Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant.

Here are the first entry definitions of Liddel-Scott lexicon:

"lasting for an age (“αἰών” 11), perpetual, eternal"

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, αἰώνιος

Doug Melven said:
What will be the sign…of the end of the eternity (Mt. 24:3)?This is aion not aionios

Obviously. Do you have a point to make?

ClementofA · Jan 20, 2018

Der Alter said:
In the same way the context of Psalms 14:1 and Psalms 53:1 does not negate the fact that both verses say "There is no God." And 2 Kings 5:15 says "there is no God in all the earth" You are not the only one who can quote out-of-context and make a writing say almost anything I want it to.

Your comparison is an extremely poor one & is therefore invalid & dismissed. Nothing in the context of Origen denies the plain implication that aionios in "after aionios life" & "beyond aionios life" makes aionios finite.

Origen speaking of "after eternal life" and "beyond eternal life", is supported also by:

Evagrius's Kephalaia Gnostika

Evagrius's Kephalaia Gnostika: A New Translation of the Unreformed Text from ...
By Ilaria L.E. Ramelli (pages 10- 11)

Where again Origen refers to what is after eternal life, as well as after "the ages", beyond "ages of the ages" [often mistranslated forever & ever] and all ages.

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

Aionios is of finite duration above, not eternal.

And yet more re Origen & aion/ios:

"Origen, the greatest exegete of the early Church, was well aware of the polysemy of aión and its adjectival forms. In Hom. in Ex. 6.13 he writes: “Whenever Scripture says, ‘from aeon to aeon,’ the reference is to an interval of time, and it is clear that it will have an end. And if Scripture says, ‘in another aeon,’ what is indicated is clearly a longer time, and yet an end is still fixed. And when the ‘aeons of the aeons’ are mentioned, a certain limit is again posited, perhaps unknown to us, but surely established by God” (quoted in Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis, p. 161). And Comm. in Rom. 6.5: “In Scriptures, aión is sometimes found in the sense of something that knows no end; at times it designates something that has no end in the present world, but will have in the future one; sometimes it means a certain stretch of time; or again the duration of the life of a single person is called aión” (quoted in Ramelli, p. 163).

Sometimes Eternity Ain’t Forever: Aiónios and the Universalist Hope

Origen speaks of "after eternal life" & "beyond eternal life":

(19) "And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life but he who is greater than Christ is greater than life."

And, again, after eternal life is a oxymoron. Unless eternal is finite in duration. Which it is.

Church Father, Origen, re everlasting (aionios) punishment (Mt.25:46) being temporary:

"That threats of aionios punishment are helpful for those immature who abstain from evil out of fear and not for love is repeated, e.g. in CC 6,26: "it is not helpful to go up to what will come beyond that punishment, for the sake of those who restrain themselves only with much difficulty, out of fear of the aionios punishment"; Hom. in Jer. 20 (19), 4: for a married woman it is better to believe that a faithless woman will undergo aionios punishment and keep faithful, rather than knowing the truth and becoming disloyal;" (p.178-9).

Ilaria Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis: A Critical Assessment from the New Testament to Eriugena (Brill, 2013. 890 pp.)

CHURCH FATHERS: Contra Celsus, Book VI (Origen)
CHURCH FATHERS: Contra Celsum, Book VI (Origen)

Furthermore, Origen sees "eternal fire" (Mt.25:41) as remedial, corrective & temporary:

"Chapter 10. On the Resurrection, and the Judgment, the Fire of Hell, and Punishments."

"1. But since the discourse has reminded us of the subjects of a future judgment and of retribution, and of the punishments of sinners, according to the threatenings of holy Scripture and the contents of the Church's teaching— viz., that when the time of judgment comes, everlasting fire, and outer darkness, and a prison, and a furnace, and other punishments of like nature, have been prepared for sinners— let us see what our opinions on these points ought to be."

"...nevertheless in such a way, that even the body which rises again of those who are to be destined to everlasting fire or to severe punishments, is by the very change of the resurrection so incorruptible, that it cannot be corrupted and dissolved even by severe punishments. If, then, such be the qualities of that body which will arise from the dead, let us now see what is the meaning of the threatening of eternal fire."

"...And when this dissolution and rending asunder of soul shall have been tested by the application of fire, a solidification undoubtedly into a firmer structure will take place, and a restoration be effected."

[De Principis Book 2]

CHURCH FATHERS: De Principiis, Book II (Origen)

More examples re aion/ios (& olam) being finite:

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell

12 points re forever and ever being finite:
For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

aionios life, 2 UR views, eon/ian ends, millennial eon, 1 Jn.1:2, Chrysoston, Origen, Dan 12 2-3:
how do people who believe in eternal torture in fire

John 3:36, 3:16, 1 Jn.1:2, aionios life:
Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Rev.14:9-11 & 20:10 & forever & ever a deceptive translation:
If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Der Alte · Jan 20, 2018

ClementofA said:
...
Exodus 31:16 KJV
Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant....

In this verse olam is paired with "throughout their generations" Here one of your favorite proof texts.

Lamentations 3:31 For the Lord will not cast off for ever:

Thus the generations of Israel will never cease to exist. In this verse olam is defined as eternal.

Der Alte · Jan 20, 2018

ClementofA said:
Your comparison is an extremely poor one & is therefore invalid & dismissed. Nothing in the context of Origen denies the plain implication that aionios in "after aionios life" & "beyond aionios life" makes aionios finite....

And nothing in the context of Psalms 14:1, Psalms 53:1 and 2 Kings 5:15 denies the plain implication that these three verses say "there is no god."

Doug Melven · Jan 20, 2018

ClementofA said:
Then why are you spending so much effort arguing against what i've posted re the early church father Greek scholars Origen & Chrysostom? If it's "irrelevant" as you say, that's all you needed to say. Though scholars, lexicographers & Bible translators disagree with you.

Mans words are not Gods words.
If something a man says does not line up with Gods Word, toss it into the trash.
If Origen and Chrysostom go beyond what God says we cannot give equal weight to there words as we do God's Word.
You give greater weight to what these men say over what God says.

ClementofA said:
Wrong. Look up the Greek text. The word is aionios, just as i posted it:

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

Aionios is of finite duration above, not eternal.

According to my Interlinear by Jay P. Green it is G165 which is aion.

ClementofA said:
Find me any Greek scholar who agrees with what you just stated.

What do you think the word "perpetual" means? Here is the 2nd definition from Webster's Dictionary:

"occurring continually : indefinitely long-continued . perpetual problems"

Did you read my post where I showed Strong's definitions of each?
Did you look at the first definition of perpetual or did you ignore it because it didn't fit with what you were saying?

ClementofA said:
Is the "perpetual" covenant of the Sabbath eternal or finite:

Eternal, because Christ is our Sabbath.

ClementofA said:
Obviously. Do you have a point to make?

Yes, your translation incorrectly translated it "Eternity" setting up a straw man and then knocking the straw man down.

Here are some verses that show olam to be infinite

Deuteronomy 33:27 The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms: and he shall thrust out the enemy from before thee; and shall say, Destroy them.
Will God's arms go away one day because they are finite?

Psalms 41:13 Blessed be the LORD God of Israel from everlasting, and to everlasting. Amen, and Amen.
Is God Himself finite?
Psalms 100:5 For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations.
Is His mercy finite?
Psalms 119:142 Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth.
Is His righteousness finite?
Psalms 119:144 The righteousness of thy testimonies is everlasting: give me understanding, and I shall live
Are His testimonies finite?
Psalms 139:24 And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.
Is His way finite?
Proverbs 10:25 As the whirlwind passeth, so is the wicked no more: but the righteous is an everlasting foundation.
Is His foundation finite?
Isaiah 26:4 Trust ye in the LORD for ever: for in the LORD JEHOVAH is everlasting strength:
Is His strength finite?
Isaiah 45:17 But Israel shall be saved in the LORD with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end.
Is His salvation finite?

ClementofA · Jan 20, 2018

Der Alter said:
Paul used aidios and aionios synonymously.

I didn't see any evidence of that in your post. Just an empty assertion. Nothing more than a guess, a theory, speculation.

Der Alter said:
In Romans 1:20 Paul refers to God’s power and Godhead as “aidios.” Scholars agree “aidios” unquestionably means eternal, everlasting, unending etc. In Rom 16:26 Paul refers to God as “aionios,” therefore Paul considers “aidios” and “aionios” to be synonymous.

Ilogical. Your conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. Therefore it is invalid. For your conclusion to be true, both aionios and aidios must mean the same thing. Not only must (1) aidios unquestionably mean eternal & only eternal, but so must (2) aionios unquestionably mean eternal & only eternal. But your argument lacks (2). And since (2) is unprovable & wrong, your conclusion can never be proven.

Der Alter said:
If aionios, alone without any other adjectives, did not mean eternal, unending, everlasting etc. he could not have used it synonymously with aiodios as he did.

I didn't see any evidence of that in your post. Just an empty assertion. Nothing more than a guess, a theory, speculation.

Der Alter said:
Nonsense and you know it! Of course all adjectives used to describe something are not synonymous. But adjectives which describe the same quality or characteristic can be synonymous.

Can be is not proven to be. Can be means maybe, maybe not, i don't know, have no clue.

Der Alter said:
You claim that aionios always means a finite period.

No, i do not, & have corrected you re this point before. See below for what i believe (2 possible views):

Context determines the meaning of a word. The same word can have more than one, or even many, meanings in different contexts.

So, to illustrate, if aionion means "eternal" in one context, it can mean a finite age or ages, epoch, era, millennium, lifetime, 3 days, long time, lasting, etc, in other passages.

In order to refute universalism you need to prove the word aionion means "eternal" when speaking of punishment. Arguing that it means "eternal" in regards to life proves nothing.

Universalists mostly agree that aionion sometimes means "eternal" & at others times it doesn't. Call that position A. And the following position B:

Some universalists, however, argue that in Scripture aionion never means eternal & that it always refers to an age, ages or a period of time that is finite. For more on that view see, for example, points 8 & 9 at posts 130 & 131 at:

What is the 2nd Death? (Annihilationsim vs. Eternal Torment)

Which leads us to the passage you refer to, 1 Jn.1:2, & the interpretation of the aforementioned "position B". It says Christ is life aionion, as 1 Jn.1:2 is to be understood. That doesn't mean that is everything Christ is. Christ is much more than that. After the aions end He will still be life, just as He was during the aions. He is both the life eonian and more than life eonian. He is life during the eons and life after the eons. So to say Christ is eonian life does not prove aionion means eternal. In fact, since the aions end, according to Scripture (Heb.9:26; 1 Cor.10:11), the eonian times (Titus 1:2, etc) must also end, as must eonian punishment (Mt.25:46). But since Christ & the saints will have immortality, incorruption, etc, their life will be endless.

BTW it's impossible for "life eonian" to be endless in the past because the eonian times had a beginning (Titus 1:2; Rom.16:25; 2 Tim.1:9). Are you going to argue that Christ had a beginning, too?

Christ Himself connected eonian life with the eon to come (Mk.10:30; Lk.18:30), yet Scripture speaks of multiple eons (ages) to come (Eph.1:21; 2:7; Lk.1:33; Rev. 22:5). So eonian life there can be understood to be restricted to a finite eon.

"In the Gospels there are instances where the substantive aion and the adjective aionios are juxtaposed or associated in a single image or utterance (most directly in Mark 10:30 and Luke 18:30). This obvious parallel in the Greek is invisible in almost every English tanslation" (p.540, The New Testament: A Translation, by EO scholar David Bentley Hart, 2017).

Considering Lk.18:30 above, ECF John Chrysostom limits aionios to a specific age of finite duration:

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 4 on Ephesians (Chrysostom)

Also another Early Church Father by the name of Origen spoke of what is "after" and "beyond" aionios life. As a native Greek speaker & scholar he knew the meaning of the word:

"...in the one who drinks of the water that Jesus gives leaps into eternal life.
And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond
eternal life." (Comm. in Io 13.3)

N.T. Wright is considered to be a leading NT scholar & his translation renders "life aionios" as "the life of God's coming age" (1 Jn.1:2, NTE). Compare:

Weymouth New Testament
the Life was manifested, and we have seen and bear witness, and we declare unto you the Life of the Ages which was with the Father and was manifested to us--

Young's Literal Translation
and the Life was manifested, and we have seen, and do testify, and declare to you the Life, the age-during, which was with the Father, and was manifested to us --

And the life was manifested, and we have seen and are testifying and reporting to you the life eonian which was toward the Father and was manifested to us. (CLV)

And, the Life, was made manifest, and we have seen, and are bearing witness, and announcing unto you, the Age-abiding Life, which, indeed, was with the Father, and was made manifest unto us; (Ro)

(and the life was manifested, and we have seen, and we bear testimony, and we declare to you the life the age-lasting, which was with the Father, and was manifested to us (Diaglott Greek-English interlinear)

...the AIONIAN LIFE...(Diaglott margin)

and announce to you the life of the Age...(The NT: A Translation, by EO scholar David Bentley Hart, 2017).

Indeed the Chayyei [Olam] was manifested, and we have seen it and we give solemn eidus (witness of testimony) and we proclaim to you the Chayyei Olam which was alongside with HaAv [Yochanan 1:1-4,14] and made hisgalus (appearance of, exposure of in revelation) to us [Shlichim]. (OJB)

Speaking of OLAM, we now turn to Dan.12:2-3, which also supports the above position:

The context suggests the view that both the life & the punishment referred to in v.2 are of finite duration (OLAM), since v.3 speaks of those who will be for OLAM "and further".

2 From those sleeping in the soil of the ground many shall awake, these to eonian life
and these to reproach for eonian repulsion." 3 The intelligent shall warn as the warning
of the atmosphere, and those justifying many are as the stars for the eon and further."
(Dan.12:2-3, CLV)

The Hebrew word for eonian (v.2) & eon (v.3) above is OLAM which is often used of limited durations in the OT. In verse 3 of Dan. 12 are the words "OLAM and further" showing an example of its finite duration in the very next words after Dan. 12:2. Thus, in context, the OLAM occurences in v.2 could also both be understood as being of finite duration.

Additionally, the early church accepted the following Greek OT translation of the Hebrew OT of Dan. 12:3:

καὶ οἱ συνιέντες ἐκλάμψουσιν ὡς ἡ λαμπρότης τοῦ στερεώματος καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν δικαίων τῶν πολλῶν ὡς οἱ ἀστέρες εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας καὶ ἔτι[and further]

Notice the words at the end saying KAI ETI, meaning "and further" or "and still" or "and yet" & other synonyms.

eti: "still, yet...Definition: (a) of time: still, yet, even now, (b) of degree: even, further, more, in addition." Strong's Greek: 2089. ἔτι (eti) -- still, yet

εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας καὶ ἔτι means "into the ages and further" as a translation of the Hebrew L'OLAM WA ED[5703, AD]

So this early church Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures agrees with the above translation (& those below) using the words "and further", "futurity", "beyond" & similarly.

3 and·the·ones-being-intelligent they-shall- warn as·warning-of the·atmosphere
and·ones-leading-to-righteousness-of the·many-ones as·the·stars for·eon and·futurity (Dan. 12:3, Hebrew-English Interlinear)
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/dan12.pdf

2 and, many of the sleepers in the dusty ground, shall awake,—these, [shall be] to age-abiding life, but, those, to reproach, and age-abiding abhorrence;
3 and, they who make wise, shall shine like the shining of the expanse,—and, they who bring the many to righteousness, like the stars to times age-abiding and beyond. (Dan. 12:2-3, Rotherham)

2 And the multitude of those sleeping in the dust of the ground do awake, some to life age-during, and some to reproaches—to abhorrence age-during.
3 And those teaching do shine as the brightness of the expanse, and those justifying the multitude as stars to the age and for ever*. (Dan. 12:2-3, YLT)
* for "for ever" Young of YLT says substitute "age during" everywhere in Scripture: http://heraldmag.org/olb/Contents/bibles/ylt.pdf

Dan. 12:2-3 was the only Biblical reference to "life OLAM" Jesus listeners had to understand His meaning of "life aionios"(life OLAM) in Mt.25:46 & elsewhere in the New Testament.

Verse 3 speaks of those justifying "many". Who are these "many"? The same "many" of verse 2, including those who were resurrected to "shame" & "contempt"? IOW the passage affirms universalism?

how do people who believe in eternal torture in fire

....

ClementofA · Jan 20, 2018

Der Alter said:
And nothing in the context of Psalms 14:1, Psalms 53:1 and 2 Kings 5:15 denies the plain implication that these three verses say "there is no god."

The first two verses you cite say it is "the fool" who says "there is no god". Therefore you should reject the statement "there is no god". OTOH, there is nothing in Origen's context indicating you should reject his words.

ClementofA · Jan 20, 2018

Doug Melven said:
You give greater weight to what these men say over what God says.

I have never said that. And categorically reject your false assertion & misrepresentation.

Though you should ask yourself why would the people of those times understand the words written in the Bible to have a different meaning from what they understood the words to mean outside of the Bible? Shouldn't they know their own language? But you don't like that because it conflicts with your opinion of the Bible.

Doug Melven said:
According to my Interlinear by Jay P. Green it is G165 which is aion.

Irrelevant. You need to look up the Greek text of Chrysostom which reads as i stated:

Doug Melven said:
Where you put aionios, it should only be aion.

Wrong. Look up the Greek text. The word is aionios, just as i posted it:

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

Aionios is of finite duration above, not eternal.

Doug Melven said:
Did you look at the first definition of perpetual or did you ignore it because it didn't fit with what you were saying?

Did you? The point is that the word "perpetual", as you defined aionios, can mean a finite duration. Which opposes your statement that aionios is not finite but timeless.

Does the word "perpetual" never refer to a finite duration here:

PERPETUAL IN THE BIBLE

Doug Melven said:
Yes, your translation incorrectly translated it "Eternity" setting up a straw man and then knocking the straw man down.

My translation? What are you talking about? And what does your remark here have to do with your previous post
repeatedly commenting that aion is not aionios? Did you copy from this site:

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell

That site already stated it was referring to the word aion. So what is the point of you posting repeatedly that aion is not aionios?

Doug Melven said:
Here are some verses that show olam to be infinite

That's your opinion. Why would i care if it sometimes means eternal when it clearly doesn't at other times? And what does any of this have to do with the context of Matt.25:46 discussed in the OP & what the meaning of aionios is there?

More examples re aion/ios (& olam) being finite:

Eternity in the Bible by Gerry Beauchemin – Hope Beyond Hell

12 points re forever and ever being finite:
For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

aionios life, 2 UR views, eon/ian ends, millennial eon, 1 Jn.1:2, Chrysoston, Origen, Dan 12 2-3:
how do people who believe in eternal torture in fire

John 3:36, 3:16, 1 Jn.1:2, aionios life:
Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Rev.14:9-11 & 20:10 & forever & ever a deceptive translation:
If endless conscious torments were true, is God a monster?

Have you been decieved by your Bible translation?

For the Lord will NOT cast off FOR EVER:

Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

Doug Melven · Jan 20, 2018

ClementofA said:
Irrelevant. You need to look up the Greek text of Chrysostom which reads as i stated:

I was unable to find Chrysostom's Greek text, I did find this though.
Taken from Church Fathers on Universalism — Classical Christianity
St. John Chrysostom ca. 349-407

There are many men, who form good hopes not by abstaining from their sins, but by thinking that hell is not so terrible as it is said to be, but milder than what is threatened, and temporary, not eternal; and about this they philosophize much. But I could show from many reasons, and conclude from the very expressions concerning hell, that it is not only not milder, but much more terrible than is threatened. But I do not now intend to discourse concerning these things. For the fear even from bare words is sufficient, though we do not fully unfold their meaning. But that it is not temporary, hear Paul now saying, concerning those who know not God, and who do not believe in the Gospel, that “they shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction.” How then is that temporary which is everlasting? “From the face of the Lord,” he says. What is this? He here wishes to say how easily it might be. For since they were then much puffed up, there is no need, he says, of much trouble; it is enough that God comes and is seen, and all are involved in punishment and vengeance. His coming only to some indeed will be Light, but to others vengeance. (Homily 3 on 2nd Thessalonians)

ClementofA said:
Did you? The point is that the word "perpetual", as you defined aionios, can mean a finite duration. Which opposes your statement that aionios is not finite but timeless.

What you don't realize is that perpetual can also mean "endless".

ClementofA · Jan 21, 2018

Doug Melven said:
What you don't realize is that perpetual can also mean "endless".

I realize it quite well, since (if you recall) it was i who gave you a link to Webster's definitions on the word. The definition (perpetual) you posted from Strong's refutes your own definition of the word aionios as not finite but timeless. You refuted yourself by posting that definition.

Doug Melven said:
I was unable to find Chrysostom's Greek text, I did find this though.

Still discussing extrabiblical texts, even though you believe they are irrelevant? Why? Shouldn't we be able to learn everything there is to know about the meanings of Bible words in dead languages from a study of the Bible alone? No.

Here's the Greek text of Chrysostom:

https://ia801309.us.archive.org/27/...4/chrysostom_pauline_homilies_field_vol_4.pdf

Doug Melven said:
Taken from Church Fathers on Universalism — Classical Christianity
St. John Chrysostom ca. 349-407

There are many men, who form good hopes not by abstaining from their sins, but by thinking that hell is not so terrible as it is said to be, but milder than what is threatened, and temporary, not eternal; and about this they philosophize much. But I could show from many reasons, and conclude from the very expressions concerning hell, that it is not only not milder, but much more terrible than is threatened. But I do not now intend to discourse concerning these things. For the fear even from bare words is sufficient, though we do not fully unfold their meaning. But that it is not temporary, hear Paul now saying, concerning those who know not God, and who do not believe in the Gospel, that “they shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction.” How then is that temporary which is everlasting? “From the face of the Lord,” he says. What is this? He here wishes to say how easily it might be. For since they were then much puffed up, there is no need, he says, of much trouble; it is enough that God comes and is seen, and all are involved in punishment and vengeance. His coming only to some indeed will be Light, but to others vengeance. (Homily 3 on 2nd Thessalonians)

That has already been addressed before, as follows.

Let's consider how the above quote may be interpreted & has almost surely been deceptively translated.

Chrysostom is saying some think of punishment as being PROSKAIROS (for a season), rather than AIONION (eonian, pertaining to an eon or eons, age, [long] lasting).

Chrysostom is arguing that Scripture does not say punishment(chastening or corrective discipline) is only for a season, only for a few months, but that it is EONIAN, lasting for a long time, an epoch, age, or ages, eon or eons.

[BTW, similarly, there was an ancient belief of some of the Jewish Rabbis that those who go to Gehenna come out of it later, one view saying they stay up to 12 months maximum.]

The contrast is between a very short time and a very long time.

If you look in English dictionaries, they also make similar contrasts. They say, for example, that "moment" is the opposite [antonym] of "age", eon, etc.. Just as short is the opposite of long.

So i suggest that Chrysostom was making a similar contrast, between a momentary or seasonal period of time, and another period of time of relatively great duration.

For a meaning of PROSKAIROS being "for a season":

Strong's Greek: 4340. πρόσκαιρος (proskairos) -- in season, i.e. temporary

John Chrysostom (c. 349-407 A.D.) "There are many men...thinking that hell is...temporary, not eternal..." (Homilies on Second Thessalonians 3 (NPNF 1 13:384).

There were many universalists in the early church. See also:

Church Fathers & Universalism since Early Church times

"For that his[Satan's] kingdom is of this age,[αἰώνιος] i.e., will cease with the present age[αιώνι] ..." (Homily 4 on Ephesians, Chapter II. Verses 1-3).

CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 4 on Ephesians (Chrysostom)

There the church father/Greek scholar uses aionios of finite duration. And associates the adjective aionios with the corresponding noun, aion.

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

ClementofA · Jan 21, 2018

Der Alter said:
Is a fountain animate or inanimate? You don't like what the scripture or Origen actually says, because it makes more sense to change the words to mean something else.

Der Alter said:
Irrelevant! Origen quoted "a fountain of water within himself which leaps into eternal life" from John 4:14 ten (10) times and never once mentioned believers leaping anywhere.

Do you suppose the water of the fountain of life within believers (which Jesus gives them) will depart from believers & leap into the Father who is "beyond life aionios"? That this fountain of living water within believers will dump them & leave them behind while the fountain of life goes on its merry way alone? It doesn't sound very "inanimate" when put it like that, does it? Rather than leaving the believer to travel all alone, Origen says the fountain of living waters within the believer are leaping & "CARRYING him to that higher life which is aionios" (13:16). Then in 13:19a the implication is that "after aionios life" perhaps the fountain of living waters will also leap into the Father who is "beyond aionios life". The first time the living waters leapt they did so within the believer & CARRIED the believer to aionios life. Do you assume it would be any different the second time? Then in 13:19b Origen identifies the life as Christ, referring back to what was just spoken by the word "For".

And what do the Scriptures in John's gospel (which Origen is commenting on & quoting) say about this fountain of LIVING (not inanimate) waters inside of all true believers in Jesus:

John 4:10
Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee LIVING water.

John 4:14
yet whoever may be drinking of the water which I shall be giving him, shall under no circumstances be thirsting for the EON, but the water which I shall be giving him will become in him a SPRING of water, WELLING up into LIFE EONian.

John 7:37
If anyone should be thirsting, let him COME TO ME and DRINK."

John 7:38-39
"He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, 'From his innermost being will flow rivers of LIVING water.'" But this He spoke of the SPIRIT, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the SPIRIT was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

John 14:6
Jesus saith unto him, I AM the way, the truth, and THE LIFE: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Doug Melven · Jan 21, 2018

ClementofA said:
I realize it quite well, since (if you recall) it was i who gave you a link to Webster's definitions on the word. The definition (perpetual) you posted from Strong's refutes your own definition of the word aionios as not finite but timeless. You refuted yourself by posting that definition.

You say you realize it can be said to be endless and then you say it can only be interpreted to mean finite.

never ending or changing.
"deep caves in perpetual darkness"
synonyms: everlasting, never-ending, eternal, permanent, unending, endless, without end, lasting, long-lasting, constant, abiding, enduring, perennial, timeless, ageless, deathless, undying, immortal; More
2.
occurring repeatedly; so frequent as to seem endless and uninterrupted.
"their perpetual money worries"
synonyms: interminable, incessant, ceaseless, endless, without respite, relentless, unrelenting, persistent, continual, continuous, nonstop, never-ending, recurrent, repeated, unremitting, sustained, around/round-the-clock, chronic, unabating;
informaleternal
"her mother's perpetual nagging"

One meaning has it to be endless or neverending.
The second meaning says it only seems to be unending.
So how did I refute myself?

ClementofA said:
Still discussing extrabiblical texts, even though you believe they are irrelevant? Why? Shouldn't we be able to learn everything there is to know about the meanings of Bible words in dead languages from a study of the Bible alone? No.

I said the extra-biblical stuff is irrelevant in determining doctrine.
If we trust in what a man says, that would be like building our house on sand.
But if we build on the Word of God, that will be like building on a ROCK.
But, to see what another person believes, it is good to look at extra-biblical material.
For instance, if someone told lies about me saying I believed something I did not believe, all somebody else would have to do is look at my posts.
But, they couldn't use my posts to determine what they believe. That must come from the Word of God.

ClementofA said:
Here's the Greek text of Chrysostom:

https://ia801309.us.archive.org/27/...4/chrysostom_pauline_homilies_field_vol_4.pdf

Do you realize this is not Scripture? It is only a commentary.
And even if he did use aionios, that proves nothing.
I read a great illustration of this the other day.
If I were to tell someone I thought Michael Jordan was on fire.
Then I told that same person I saw a building was on fire.
Would anyone think I meant that Michael Jordan was literally in flames and needed to stop-drop-and roll?
Or would anyone think that the building was only figuratively on fire and not bother calling 9-1-1?
Same phrase, "was on fire" used in 2 different ways with 2 different meanings.

ClementofA · Jan 21, 2018

Doug Melven said:
You say you realize it can be said to be endless and then you say it can only be interpreted to mean finite

No, the Websters definition i posted a link to gave 3 definitions of perpetual. Here it is again:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perpetual

Doug Melven said:
One meaning has it to be endless or neverending.
The second meaning says it only seems to be unending.
So how did I refute myself?

I already told you:

The definition (perpetual) you posted from Strong's refutes your own definition of the word aionios as not finite but timeless. You refuted yourself by posting that definition.

Since the definition of the word "perpetual" (see Webster's above) is not limited to your definition of "not finite but timeless", but also includes what is of indefinite duration, hence can be finite & not timeless, which opposes your definition.

BTW you didn't provide a link or reference to whatever you were quoting. And the synonyms included "lasting" & "long lasting", which can be finite.

Doug Melven said:
I said the extra-biblical stuff is irrelevant in determining doctrine.

You said this regarding how Origen uses the word aionios:

Doug Melven said:
How someone uses a word outside of Scripture is irrelevant.

Then why are you spending so much effort arguing against what i've posted re the early church father Greek scholars Origen & Chrysostom? If it's "irrelevant" as you say, that's all you needed to say. Though scholars, lexicographers & Bible translators disagree with you.

Doug Melven said:
Do you realize this is not Scripture? It is only a commentary.

Is this supposed to be a serious question?

Doug Melven said:
And even if he did use aionios, that proves nothing.

So according to you the entire body of usage of how aionios was used & understood by the early church & other ancients is irrelevant & proves nothing unless the word appears in Scripture? I think we've covered this already. So why are you still talking about it, repeating the same point over & over again? Why not address some of the links to Scripture discussions i've repeatedly given you where i comment upon the occurrences of aionios in the Scriptures? If that's what you want to discuss:

12 points re forever and ever being finite:
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...-not-cast-off-for-ever.8041512/#post-72126038

aionios life, 2 UR views, eon/ian ends, millennial eon, 1 Jn.1:2, Chrysoston, Origen, Dan 12 2-3:
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...torture-in-fire.8041369/page-30#post-72154410

John 3:36, 3:16, 1 Jn.1:2, aionios life:
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...error-re-matthew-25-46.8041938/#post-72178491

Rev.14:9-11 & 20:10 & forever & ever a deceptive translation:
https://www.christianforums.com/thr...is-god-a-monster.8042349/page-8#post-72158527

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/have-you-been-decieved-by-your-bible-translation.8039822/

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/for-the-lord-will-not-cast-off-for-ever.8041512/

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/augustines-ignorance-error-re-matthew-25-46.8041938/

Der Alte · Jan 21, 2018

ClementofA said:
Begin quote

Do you suppose the water of the fountain of life within believers (which Jesus gives them) will depart from believers & leap into the Father who is "beyond life aionios"? That this fountain of living water within believers will dump them & leave them behind while the fountain of life goes on its merry way alone? It doesn't sound very "inanimate" when put it like that, does it? Rather than leaving the believer to travel all alone, Origen says the fountain of living waters within the believer are leaping & "CARRYING him to that higher life which is aionios" (13:16). [False! DA]Then in 13:19a the implication is that "after aionios life" perhaps the fountain of living waters will also leap into the Father who is "beyond aionios life". The first time the living waters leapt they did so within the believer & CARRIED the believer to aionios life.[False! DA] Do you assume it would be any different the second time? Then in 13:19b Origen identifies the life as Christ, referring back to what was just spoken by the word "For". ...

End

(16) [1]Wherefore, even if someone should be convinced by what is said and agree, he will find later, nevertheless, that he has the same deficiency that he had before he learned these things. [2]But I have teaching that is such that it becomes a fountain of living water in the one who has received what I have declared. [3]And he who has received of my water will receive so great a benefit that a fountain capable of discovering everything that is investigated will gush forth within him. [4]The waters will leap upward; his understanding will spring up and fly as swiftly as possible in accordance with this briskly flowing water, the springing and leaping itself carrying him to that higher life which is eternal.
Origen. (1993). Commentary on the Gospel according to John Books 13–32. (T. P. Halton, Ed., R. E. Heine, Trans.) (Vol. 89, p. 72). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

First before I address this fairy tale where is any scripture which supports all your 'suppose',"implication" and "assume" above? Please note Origen's words vs. your assumption, "his understanding will spring up and fly as swiftly as possible... the springing and leaping itself carrying him to that higher life which is eternal." "His understanding NOT the spring or the water. Your assumption "Origen says the fountain of living waters within the believer are leaping & "CARRYING him to that higher life which is aionios" is false. "In accordance with" 4th sentence 13.16 does not mean "carry" or "carried."

(18) For, as there, the bridegroom leaps upon souls that are more noble-natured and divine, called mountains, and skips upon the inferior ones called hills, [Song of Solomon 2:8] so here the fountain that appears in the one who drinks of the water that Jesus gives leaps into eternal life.
(19) And after eternal life, perhaps it will also leap into the Father who is beyond eternal life. For Christ is life; but he who is greater than Christ is greater than life.20[fn. John 14:28]
Origen. (1993). Commentary on the Gospel according to John Books 13–32. (T. P. Halton, Ed., R. E. Heine, Trans.) (Vol. 89, pp. 72–73). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

Note the word "also" in "perhaps it will also leap, into the Father." Someone or something, leaped but not into the father, So the "also" can only refer to the verb "leap." What or who leaped before? The fountain 13.18. And "perhaps [not certain], it [the fountain] will also leap into the father." As I said before Origen quoted John 4:14 ten times in his commentary 13 and never once says anything about "after eternal life" for believers.

Der Alte · Jan 21, 2018

ClementofA said:
. . . That has already been addressed before, as follows.
Let's consider how the above quote may be interpreted & has almost surely been deceptively translated.
Chrysostom is saying some think of punishment as being PROSKAIROS (for a season), rather than AIONION (eonian, pertaining to an eon or eons, age, [long] lasting).
Chrysostom is arguing that Scripture does not say punishment(chastening or corrective discipline) is only for a season, only for a few months, but that it is EONIAN, lasting for a long time, an epoch, age, or ages, eon or eons. ...

This exposes the deception of UR. According to this "proskairos" is only for a few months and "eonion" is a long time. But we know that Jonah 2:6 LXX the three days Jonah spent in the fish is called an eon.

Augustine's ignorance & error re Matthew 25:46

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.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

This is me about 1 yr. old.

This is me about 1 yr. old.

Similar threads