Maybe "eternal" doesn't mean "unending"

[Armistead14]

Immortal is what the human soul is. God is eternal, everlasting in existense, which is different than being simply "immortal" as the former implies no beginning, while the latter does not. The word 'immortal' has a different greek word than what is used here in those verses relating to the divine, which I am sure you must be aware of. The greek for "immortal" is "athanatos" instead of the greek "aion" or "aionos."

It is true that the greek for "eternal" comes from the root "aion" which means "age," but just because a root means age does not mean every subsequently word from the root means age, as it is with God in the Romans verse and the others I qouted.

Like I said, if you're comortable maintaining God is not eternal and could possibly cease to exist by saying the Romans verse doesn't indicate the everlasting nature of God, that is up to you.

Either way I am not claiming all verses that have the word 'eternal' do mean without end, I said the ones that I qouted do mean just that, which I am sure says something of your 4/5s meaning they do not, of which is actually on you to show.

Where did I ever say God isn't eternal or could cease to exist? Let's have an honest debate. I don't claim to have all the answers, but don't put words in my mouth...deal?

I think to a point we're in agreement if you read my post, that we can only define what aion means regarding the subject matter. Your error is to make "age/aion" immortal referring to God's punishments in the ages he works with man. God himself is immortal even though he works in the ages aion of humanity.

I agreed with you that that the ones you qouted refer to endless time, because the reference is towards God, who we know is beyond time.

As for how many times aion means age or eternity, I'll submit you to your own study, I certainly haven't counted or viewed them all myself, that is the opinion of most, because mostly aion is used in the NT in regards to an age...For instance.

Matthew 24:3
Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when these things will be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age (aion)?”

Here in this verse, we know this aion/age ends. Jesus’s disciples are enquiring about His Second Coming. Notice that the disciples understood that when Jesus Christ returns to earth, it will mark the end of this present aion which is correctly translated as ‘age’.The expression ‘the end of the age’ is used several times in the Bible, which clearly shows that aion in certain contexts means an age, a time-period, which begins and ends. The KJV has preferred to mistranslate aion in the majority of cases to mean ‘world’ where the Bible means age or ages. ‘World’ is a bad translation of aion because the Greek word for ‘world’ is kosmos and not aion. Also, when Christ returns, it will mark the end of the age, and not the end of the world... Why such a poor translation, one can only guess, but seems it was to promote a world view of life and afterlife, instead of God working in the ages, much easier to defend ET that way, wrong as it is.


If you want to compare age regarding for a period or eternity, help yourself
Strong's...

GREEK WORD STUDY on αἰών (Gtr. aion) meaning 'age' or 'ever' Strong's 165

 

[elopez]

I think you may want to pay closer attention to what I actually say if you want an honest debate. I never said you said God isn't eternal, so I couldn't have been putting words in your mouth. What I said was if you disregard the Romans verse as meaning without end, then you deny the eternal nature of God. You say you agree in that verse aionios means without end, so there is no issue with that.

I highly disagree that it is an error to think punishment refers to without end. It is because in all the verses you agree where aionios means without end, the same word is used to describe punishment.

It's fine if you don't want to support your claim of how maby times aionios mean of age, but seriously look at how your argument appears to me. You say it means of age mainly everytime in the NT, yet you only qoute one verse, while I have qouted four that show the exact opposite, and those are only four!

Moreover, once we turn to Strongs it becomes that much more obvioys how flat out wrong you are. Read it for yourself, when it comes to punishment and the duration of such, even Strongs says "the punishment reffered to in 2 Th 1:9, is not temporary, but final, and accordingly, the phraseology shows that it's purpose is not remedial but retributive."

 

[Armistead14]

I think you may want to pay closer attention to what I actually say if you want an honest debate. I never said you said God isn't eternal, so I couldn't have been putting words in your mouth. What I said was if you disregard the Romans verse as meaning without end, then you deny the eternal nature of God. You say you agree in that verse aionios means without end, so there is no issue with that.

I highly disagree that it is an error to think punishment refers to without end. It is because in all the verses you agree where aionios means without end, the same word is used to describe punishment.

It's fine if you don't want to support your claim of how maby times aionios mean of age, but seriously look at how your argument appears to me. You say it means of age mainly everytime in the NT, yet you only qoute one verse, while I have qouted four that show the exact opposite, and those are only four!

Moreover, once we turn to Strongs it becomes that much more obvioys how flat out wrong you are. Read it for yourself, when it comes to punishment and the duration of such, even Strongs says "the punishment reffered to in 2 Th 1:9, is not temporary, but final, and accordingly, the phraseology shows that it's purpose is not remedial but retributive."

Your statement.

"Like I said, if you're comortable maintaining God is not eternal and could possibly cease to exist by saying the Romans verse doesn't indicate the everlasting nature of God, that is up to you"

Since you were responding to me, I would assume "if you're" was referring to me... I guess you were referring to someone else.


Sorry, if you need me to qoute the 100's of verses that denote aion means for an age, I can paste them all for you, I gave you one example and a link where you could count for yourself... I hardly agree with Strong's opinion, but know you ET'ers like strong, but anyone can use the link to see aion is often used in the NT to denote an age or the ages....Do you really want me to post some verses, I can copy and paste with the best of them....? Would that change your mind? I await your reply..

I explained your other issues in detail in my other post which you haven't refuted, either you didn't read them or you have no refute.

Again, numbers don't matter, even though aion as age outnumber aion/olam as eternal in both the OT and NT, you must consider how the adjective modifies the noun, ain't explaining it again....

 

[elopez]

I was reffering to you, but the fact of the matter is I never actually claimed yoy said God isn'y eternal. Again, if you really want an honest debate, read and respond to what I did say.

If you disregard Strongs opinion, then why on earth make a reference to it? I don't follow that at all. You make a refernce to Strongs as an attempt to support your argument, but as soon as soon as it is shown Strongs destroys what you're saying, you want to ignore it. How convient that it is. And if numbers do not matter, then it is completely irrelevant that, as you say, the meaning refers to of age more than without end.

 

[Armistead14]

I think your statement speaks for itself, but it's a mute issue, so let's move on.

I reject much of Strong's opinion, because of their tradition use of latin and english over the original greek, that doesn't mean the list in the link doesn't contain the info you need regarding the subject at hand. I figured it easier to use a source most ET'ers reference to prove my point to you....Anyone can click on the link and easily get my point...The point of the link was the numerous verses Strong admits denote aion as for the age...doesn't mean I have to agree with how they view every other possible verse. One doesn't have to agree 100% with anyone or thing to seek truth. I don't agree with my wife 100% of the time, but she is still my wife...

I have read and responded to you in detail in several long post, not yet refuted by you, seems you're more interested in the smoke and mirrors approach...

 

[elopez]

My statement does speak for itself, of which is conditional, hence why I wasn't saying anything about what you think eternal means ot doesn't mean.

Strong actually uses the orignak greek, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. And remember, as you even said numbers are irrelevant, so when it comes down to it referring to Strongs to prove a point of how many times it references of age more than without end, is, well, pointless. Again, I question why you even turn to Strongs for that "point."

For the matter of refutation, you haven't given me much to refute. You say you'll leave me to my own study, which by the way, I have not once said aionios cannot mean of age, but only that it doesn't always mean that, as I have shown. You gave me one verse recently that goes to show it does mean of age, and I'm not going to refute that just as you're not going to of the verses I gave that mean endless duration. Plus, Strongs makes a pretty good case against what you've said.