The meaning of αἰώνιος/aionios and αἰών/aion.

[JSRG]

Question. Are you arguing to say that there is no such thing as eternal life? I am confused as to what you wish to prove.

The argument Der Alter was making, as far as I could tell, was to point to usages of the Greek word aionios from early Christian writings, saying they meant eternal when referring to time. The problem is that some of the writings he pointed to were in Latin (either because they were originally written that way or because they are only available in a Latin translation of a now-lost Greek text) and didn't have the word aionios, because it's not a Latin word. The Latin word that was used might have meant "eternal" but again, it wasn't aionios because it's a different language.

It would be like me, in trying to demonstrate how the word "beautiful" is used in English, to point to a piece of Spanish writing that used, say, "hermoso."

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what he's doing, which is why I'm asking.

 

[GenemZ]

The argument Der Alter was making, as far as I could tell, was to point to usages of the Greek word aionios from early Christian writings, saying they meant eternal when referring to time. The problem is that some of the writings he pointed to were in Latin (either because they were originally written that way or because they are only available in a Latin translation of a now-lost Greek text) and didn't have the word aionios, because it's not a Latin word. The Latin word that was used might have meant "eternal" but again, it wasn't aionios because it's a different language.

It would be like me, in trying to demonstrate how the word "beautiful" is used in English, to point to a piece of Spanish writing that used, say, "hermoso."

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what he's doing, which is why I'm asking.

Well... that's one argument I wish not to get caught in the middle of.

But, one point of what you said I would like to comment on.

...was to point to usages of the Greek word aionios from early Christian writings, saying they meant eternal when referring to time.

"Eternal" actually is not referring to time. Its outside of time.

"Forever" starts in time and then never ends.

God is eternal. Meaning He had no beginning and has no end. Any beginning depends upon time to be existing to make it have a beginning. Time was an invention of God's... like water was invented for fish to be placed in? Time is what we are now placed in.

Once we enter into eternity? Time ceases to exist. To dwell on trying to picture what it would be like for too long causes an odd feeling. Its like finding yourself 100 feet out from an edge of a cliff, and suddenly you realize have been standing on air.

grace and peace.....

 

[Running2win]

Is. 34: 9 Edom’s streams will be turned into pitch,

her dust into burning sulfur;

her land will become blazing pitch!

10

It will not be quenched night or day;

its smoke will rise forever.

From generation to generation it will lie desolate;

no one will ever pass through it again.

Is Edom still smoking?

It hasn't been lit yet. Only during and after day of the Lords wrath will this Scripture be fulfilled. Just read the context above.

8For the LORD has a day of vengeance,
A year of recompense for the cause of Zion.

 

[Running2win]

Well... that's one argument I wish not to get caught in the middle of.

But, one point of what you said I would like to comment on.



"Eternal" actually is not referring to time. Its outside of time.

"Forever" starts in time and then never ends.

God is eternal. Meaning He had no beginning and has no end. Any beginning depends upon time to be existing to make it have a beginning. Time was an invention of God's... like water was invented for fish to be placed in? Time is what we are now placed in.

Once we enter into eternity? Time ceases to exist. To dwell on trying to picture what it would be like for too long causes an odd feeling. Its like finding yourself 100 feet out from an edge of a cliff, and suddenly you realize have been standing on air.

grace and peace.....

Would not it be more correct to say we won't be bound by time then? Time will still take place, the sun and moon will be changed but last forever. God is not bound by time but has created time and uses it for His administration of the universe-that will never end.

The tree of life will produce its fruit 12 times a year- most likely different fruits for each different month. So this shows time is still being used by God.

It also says there will be no need for light or the sun-not that there won't be a sun and moon and stars, because God will illuminate the city-His glory/ radiance. Just like the glory on the mount of transfiguration. Again, a time signature. (Mat 17)

We are all use to time and God uses time to order things in the universe, from the creation moment and forever.

Rev 22,

1Then he showed me a river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb, 2in the middle of its street. On either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3There will no longer be any curse; and the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and His bond-servants will serve Him; 4they will see His face, and His name will be on their foreheads. 5And there will no longer be any night; and they will not have need of the light of a lamp nor the light of the sun, because the Lord God will illumine them; and they will reign forever and ever.

Isa 60,

19“No longer will you have the sun for light by day,
Nor for brightness will the moon give you light;
But you will have the LORD for an everlasting light,
And your God for your glory.

20“Your sun will no longer set,
Nor will your moon wane;
For you will have the LORD for an everlasting light,
And the days of your mourning will be over.

21“Then all your people will be righteous;
They will possess the land forever,
The branch of My planting,
The work of My hands,
That I may be glorified.

22“The smallest one will become a clan,
And the least one a mighty nation.
I, the LORD, will hasten it in its time.”

Jer 31,

35Thus says the LORD,
Who gives the sun for light by day
And the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night,
Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar;
The LORD of hosts is His name:

36“If this fixed order departs
From before Me,” declares the LORD,
“Then the offspring of Israel also will cease
From being a nation before Me forever.”

37Thus says the LORD,
“If the heavens above can be measured
And the foundations of the earth searched out below,
Then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel
For all that they have done,” declares the LORD.

 

[Der Alte]

I'm confused here. Some of the works you cite are either not in Greek or, while originally in Greek, exist to us only in translation. For example:
We have very little of Against Heresies in the original Greek. What we largely rely on is a Latin translation (apparently an Armenian translation of Books 4 and 5 is preserved, but that's inapplicable here). There are fragments of the original Greek version of Against Heresies that survive, either through literal fragments of paper or through quotations by other writers of the original text... is this portion preserved in one of those? Otherwise, it's just a guess that the word "aionios" was found in the original Greek.
The same thing actually applies here. De Principiis (On the First Principles) was written in Greek, but we don't have the Greek outside of some scattered quotations from it. Our "full" version is just Rufinus's highly edited Latin translation. Again we do have portions of the original Greek, but does it include this section?
While in the above examples it is possible that the passages were preserved in some Greek text, that's not the case here because Cyprian wrote in Latin. "Aionios" couldn't have been in there!
Novatian also wrote in Latin, not Greek. Thus there was no usage of "aionios."
So I'm kind of confused as to how you're citing these for usage of "aionios" when the word inherently can't be in there because it's a Greek, not a Latin, word. While it's possible that Origen and Irenaeus did use "aionios" in their original Greek text, that's ultimately speculation, and not really something to build an argument about the meaning of "aionios" on.

I thank you for your interest in my post. Where might I verify what you have said here?
Even if correct, where the writer is quoting or referring to scriptures as they are in most cases, what other kind of "[adjective] zoe" is mentioned in the NT except aionios zoe?
We also have the witness from the ECF whose writings we have in Greek. But here is more evidence.
…..Greek is now, and for 2000+ years has been, the language of the Eastern Greek Orthodox church. Who, better than the native Greek speaking scholars who translated the “literal” Greek Eastern Orthodox Bible [EOB], know the correct meaning of Greek words, e.g. “Gehenna,””aiōnios,”“kolasis” etc?
EOB, footnote pg. 180

“Hades is the realm of the dead. The upper part of hades was considered to be
luminous and it was called “paradise” or "Abraham's bosom.” Hades is not to be
confused with hell (Gehenna) which is the final place of state or place of the
damned (“the lake of’ fire”).”​

= = = = = = = = = =
The Eastern Greek Orthodox Bible EOB—New Testament 96

Matthew 25:46 Then he will answer them saying ‘Amen. I tell you: as much as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.' “These [[ones on the left]] will go away into eternal punishment.[κολασιν αιονιον/kolasin aiōnion] but the righteous into eternal life.​

= = = = = = = = = =

KJV Romans 16:26 [EOB 14:25]
26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting [αιωνιου/aiōniou] God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:​

Paul, the same writer, in the same writing, the book of Romans, uses αιωνιου/aiōniou, in Rom 16:26 synonymous with αιδιος/aidios in Rom 1:20, below.

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world, his invisible things are clearly seen. They perceived through created things, even his everlasting [τε αιδιος/te aidios] power and divinity.​

Scholars unanimously agree that “aidios” means “eternal/everlasting.”
Thus this shows conclusively that “aionios” means “eternal/everlasting.”
= = = = = = = =
https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/books/or...tament-(The-Eastern-Greek-Orthodox-Bible).pdf
The Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible EOB—New Testament 96 can be viewed or D/L at the above link. For any doubts/questions about the EOB version please read the 200 page preface which documents the extensive Greek scholarship supporting this translation.

 

[GenemZ]

Would not it be more correct to say we won't be bound by time then? Time will still take place, the sun and moon will be changed but last forever. God is not bound by time but has created time and uses it for His administration of the universe-that will never end.

The tree of life will produce its fruit 12 times a year- most likely different fruits for each different month. So this shows time is still being used by God.

It also says there will be no need for light or the sun-not that there won't be a sun and moon and stars, because God will illuminate the city-His glory/ radiance. Just like the glory on the mount of transfiguration. Again, a time signature. (Mat 17)

We are all use to time and God uses time to order things in the universe, from the creation moment and forever.

Rev 22,

1Then he showed me a river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne of God and of the Lamb, 2in the middle of its street. On either side of the river was the tree of life, bearing twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit every month; and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. 3There will no longer be any curse; and the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in it, and His bond-servants will serve Him; 4they will see His face, and His name will be on their foreheads. 5And there will no longer be any night; and they will not have need of the light of a lamp nor the light of the sun, because the Lord God will illumine them; and they will reign forever and ever.

Isa 60,

19“No longer will you have the sun for light by day,
Nor for brightness will the moon give you light;
But you will have the LORD for an everlasting light,
And your God for your glory.

20“Your sun will no longer set,
Nor will your moon wane;
For you will have the LORD for an everlasting light,
And the days of your mourning will be over.

21“Then all your people will be righteous;
They will possess the land forever,
The branch of My planting,
The work of My hands,
That I may be glorified.

22“The smallest one will become a clan,
And the least one a mighty nation.
I, the LORD, will hasten it in its time.”

Jer 31,

35Thus says the LORD,
Who gives the sun for light by day
And the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night,
Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar;
The LORD of hosts is His name:

36“If this fixed order departs
From before Me,” declares the LORD,
“Then the offspring of Israel also will cease
From being a nation before Me forever.”

37Thus says the LORD,
“If the heavens above can be measured
And the foundations of the earth searched out below,
Then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel
For all that they have done,” declares the LORD.

In eternity? There will be no more sun to give light. There will be no more night.

Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal,
flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the
great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life,
bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves
of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be any
curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his
servants will serve him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their
foreheads. There will be no more night. They will not need the light of
a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light.
And they will reign for ever and ever." Rev 22:1-5

​

Just as the first three days "light" in Genesis One were produced without having any sun, the Lord will be the Light of the New World. We will not be living in time (we can never age, nor die).. yet it might appear there will the existence of time for other things. For it says the trees will be yielding its fruit every 'month.' But? 'Every month' means "never ending."

So? We just need to sit tight and know that when "the Change" takes place we will feel totally at home with it. Everyone is going to feel at home at all times and wherever they may be or go.

What little children adore in their hearts as a fairy tale "happily ever after" will become our adult reality. It will be all joy. From joy to joy. There will be certain experiences that will be so sacred we would dare not try to create words for it. It just will be simply known, understood, and acknowledged one to another when shared.

Right now we have to keep adapting through grace and growing in knowledge to keep the garbage of the Devil's world from polluting our minds and thoughts. For the Devil wants to trash everything the God says is good.


grace and peace.....

 

[JSRG]

I thank you for your interest in my post. Where might I verify what you have said here?

Did you not look at the texts themselves? You are, after all, arguing that the word "aionios" or some declension thereof was being used here. If you didn't check the texts for yourself, then I presume you were either simply assuming aionios was there based on the English translation (which is pretty bad) or were using someone else's work without knowing they were in error (which is much more understandable, but still in need of correction).

But to see that they aren't in Greek, all one has to actually do is look at the text; you won't find a full Greek text of Against Heresies or On the First Principles because they don't exist anymore. And if the text isn't in Greek, one obviously can't cite usage of a Greek word in it--unless it's one of the few passages that was quoted in a surviving work or exists in a physical fragment. It's why in Migne's Patrologia Graeca, a collection of Greek texts by early Christians, the works are not in Greek (outside of a few sections where we have surviving fragments and the Greek text of those is provided) and instead are in Latin, despite being in Patrologia Graeca rather than Patrologia Latina (the latter being a collection of Latin texts by early Christians).

But if you don't want to look into that, just looking up general information on the texts or the writers should demonstrate this. If you won't trust Wikipedia (which does mention this on their pages), then try the introductions to the works in the Roberts-Donaldson translations in Ante Nicene Fathers:

Against Heresies: "The great work of Irenaeus, now for the first time translated into English, is unfortunately no longer extant in the original. It has come down to us only in an ancient Latin version, with the exception of the greater part of the first book, which has been preserved in the original Greek, through means of copious quotations made by Hippolytus and Epiphanius."

De Principiis (On the First Principles): "It is much to be regretted that the original Greek of the De Principiis has for the most part perished. We possess it chiefly in a Latin translation by Rufinus. And there can be no doubt that he often took great liberties with his author."

As for Novatian and Cyprian, one would simply assume, without any further need of research, that Latin writers would be writing in Latin.

Even if correct, where the writer is quoting or referring to scriptures as they are in most cases, what other kind of "[adjective] zoe" is mentioned in the NT except aionios zoe?

I'm not trying to argue anything about the meaning of aionios. I'm just trying to say that some of the things you're pointing to can't be used for that because the word aionios isn't being used because it's not a Greek text at all. If you're going to make an argument about the meaning of "aionios" based on how it's being used, you should have your examples actually use the word aionios.

 

[Der Alte]

Did you not look at the texts themselves? You are, after all, arguing that the word "aionios" or some declension thereof was being used here. If you didn't check the texts for yourself, then I presume you were either simply assuming aionios was there based on the English translation (which is pretty bad) or were using someone else's work without knowing they were in error (which is much more understandable, but still in need of correction).
But to see that they aren't in Greek, all one has to actually do is look at the text; you won't find a full Greek text of Against Heresies or On the First Principles because they don't exist anymore. And if the text isn't in Greek, one obviously can't cite usage of a Greek word in it--unless it's one of the few passages that was quoted in a surviving work or exists in a physical fragment. It's why in Migne's Patrologia Graeca, a collection of Greek texts by early Christians, the works are not in Greek (outside of a few sections where we have surviving fragments and the Greek text of those is provided) and instead are in Latin, despite being in Patrologia Graeca rather than Patrologia Latina (the latter being a collection of Latin texts by early Christians).
But if you don't want to look into that, just looking up general information on the texts or the writers should demonstrate this. If you won't trust Wikipedia (which does mention this on their pages), then try the introductions to the works in the Roberts-Donaldson translations in Ante Nicene Fathers:
Against Heresies: "The great work of Irenaeus, now for the first time translated into English, is unfortunately no longer extant in the original. It has come down to us only in an ancient Latin version, with the exception of the greater part of the first book, which has been preserved in the original Greek, through means of copious quotations made by Hippolytus and Epiphanius."
De Principiis (On the First Principles): "It is much to be regretted that the original Greek of the De Principiis has for the most part perished. We possess it chiefly in a Latin translation by Rufinus. And there can be no doubt that he often took great liberties with his author."
As for Novatian and Cyprian, one would simply assume, without any further need of research, that Latin writers would be writing in Latin.
I'm not trying to argue anything about the meaning of aionios. I'm just trying to say that some of the things you're pointing to can't be used for that because the word aionios isn't being used because it's not a Greek text at all. If you're going to make an argument about the meaning of "aionios" based on how it's being used, you should have your examples actually use the word aionios.

I guess you didn't like or out right reject my explanation. In the future I will make note of your objections and include my explanation.
To wit:

Some of the following ECF writings exist only in Latin translated from an original Greek, which no longer exists, or were originally written in Latin. Their writings reflect their understanding of the original Greek of the NT. ​

I may expand that after I give it more thought.

 

[JSRG]

I guess you didn't like or out right reject my explanation. In the future I will make note of your objections and include my explanation.

I'm confused. What explanation did you offer? In reply to my post, after asking for verification, you started talking about the meaning of "aionios" based on the translations in the English Greek Orthodox Bible, but that has nothing to do with what I said.

Or maybe you meant the comment of "Even if correct, where the writer is quoting or referring to scriptures as they are in most cases, what other kind of "[adjective] zoe" is mentioned in the NT except aionios zoe?" But the quotations you provided from Irenaeus/Origen/Novatian/Cyprian weren't them quoting from the New Testament anyway, so this claim wouldn't apply to them.

I'm not trying to argue against any other points you made here. Just the error of pointing to writings where aionios isn't used as evidence of how aionios was used.

To wit:

Some of the following ECF writings exist only in Latin translated from an original Greek, which no longer exists, or were originally written in Latin. Their writings reflect their understanding of the original Greek of the NT. ​

I may expand that after I give it more thought.

Well, in the case of the quotes you mentioned in the writers I discussed, this wouldn't apply for the reasons given already. But it especially wouldn't apply to Cyprian or Novatian as their works (and thus any quotations) were in Latin to begin with.

 

[Der Alte]

I'm confused. What explanation did you offer? In reply to my post, after asking for verification, you started talking about the meaning of "aionios" based on the translations in the English Greek Orthodox Bible, but that has nothing to do with what I said.
Or maybe you meant the comment of "Even if correct, where the writer is quoting or referring to scriptures as they are in most cases, what other kind of "[adjective] zoe" is mentioned in the NT except aionios zoe?" But the quotations you provided from Irenaeus/Origen/Novatian/Cyprian weren't them quoting from the New Testament anyway, so this claim wouldn't apply to them.
I'm not trying to argue against any other points you made here. Just the error of pointing to writings where aionios isn't used as evidence of how aionios was used.
Well, in the case of the quotes you mentioned in the writers I discussed, this wouldn't apply for the reasons given already. But it especially wouldn't apply to Cyprian or Novatian as their works (and thus any quotations) were in Latin to begin with.

Your reply,

But it especially wouldn't apply to Cyprian or Novatian as their works (and thus any quotations) were in Latin to begin with."​

What I said "Some of the following ECF writings exist only in Latin translated from an original Greek, which no longer exists, or were originally written in Latin."
Let's try this again.
These ECF define “aionion” as eternal/everlasting.

[1]Ignatius [A.D. 30-107.] The Epistle to the RomansChap VII
David and Abraham; and I desire the drink of God, namely His blood, which is incorruptible love and eternal life.​

“Eternal life” is paired with “incorruptible love.”

[2]Justin The First Apology. Chap XIII
For they proclaim our madness to consist in this, that we give to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all; for they do not discern the mystery that is herein, to which, as we make it plain to you, we pray you to give heed. ​

“Eternal” is paired with “unchangeable.”

[3]Irenaeus Against Heresies. Book II. Chap V
3. The [immediate] Creator, then, is not the [real] Author of this work, thinking, as He did, that He formed it very good, but He who allows and approves of the productions of defect, and the works of error having a place among his own possessions, and that temporal things should be mixed up with eternal, corruptible with incorruptible, and those which partake of error with those which belong to truth. ​

“eternal” is contrasted with “temporal/temporary” and paired with “incorruptible.”

[4]Athenagoras A Plea for the Christians.
Chap. X. - The Christians Worship the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
That we are not atheists, therefore, seeing that we acknowledge one God, uncreated, eternal, invisible, impassible, incomprehensible, illimitable, who is apprehended by the understanding only and the reason, who is encompassed by light, and beauty, and spirit, and power ineffable, by whom the universe has been created through His Logos, and set in order, and is kept in being - I have sufficiently demonstrated. [I say “His Logos”], for we acknowledge also a Son of God. ​

“eternal” is paired with “impassible,” “illimitable” and “ineffable.”

[5]Fragments of Clemens Alexandrinus. – I. - From the Latin Translation of Cassiodorus.
“For he that will love life, and see good days;” (1Pe_3:10) that is, who wishes to become eternal and immortal. And He calls the Lord life, and the days good, that is holy.​

“eternal” is paired with “immortal.”

[6]Tertullian Part first Apology Chap. XLV
No doubt about it, we, who receive our awards under the judgment of an all-seeing God, and who look forward to eternal punishment from Him for sin, — we alone make real effort to attain a blameless life, under the influence of our ampler knowledge, the impossibility of concealment, and the greatness of the threatened torment, not merely long-enduring but everlasting, fearing Him, whom he too should fear who the fearing judges, — even God, I mean, and not the proconsul. ​

“eternal/everlasting” is contrasted with “long-enduring.”

[7]Origen De Principiis. Book I. Chap II
I11. That is properly termed everlasting or eternal which neither had a beginning of existence, nor can ever cease to be what it is. And this is the idea conveyed by John when he says that “God is light.” Now His wisdom is the splendour of that light, not only in respect of its being light, but also of being everlasting light, so that His wisdom is eternal and everlasting splendour. ​

“everlasting” and “eternal” are described as “neither had a beginning of existence, nor can ever cease to be what it is.”

[8]The Epistles of Cyprian. Epistle LXXX
2. Let no one think of death, but of immortality; nor of temporary punishment, but of eternal glory; since it is written, “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints;” (Psa_116:15) and again, “A broken spirit is a sacrifice to God: a contrite and humble heart God doth not despise.” ​

“eternal” is paired with “immortality” and contrasted with “temporary.”

[9]Novatian Treatise Concerning the Trinity. Chap. XXXI.
Thus God the Father, the Founder and Creator of all things, who only knows no beginning, invisible, infinite, immortal, eternal, is one God;. ​

“eternal” is described as “knows no beginning, … infinite, immortal”

[10]Gregory Thaumututgus A Declaration of Faith Part 1
There is one Lord, Only of the Only,3 God of God, Image and Likeness of Deity, Efficient Word,4 Wisdom comprehensive5 of the constitution of all things, and Power formative6 of the whole creation, true Son of true Father, Invisible of Invisible, and Incorruptible of Incorruptible, and Immortal of Immortal and eternal of eternal.​

“eternal” is paired with “Incorruptible” and “Immortal.”

See next post.

 

[Der Alte]

[11]Dialogue of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr, with Trypho, a Jew. Chap XXXI
And His dominion is an everlasting dominion,[Daniel 7:14] which shall not be taken away; and His kingdom shall not be destroyed. ​

“Everlasting dominion” paired with “shall not be taken away” and “shall not be destroyed.”

[12]Dialogue of Justin, Philosopher and Martyr, with Trypho, a Jew. Chap. CXVII
But these filthy garments, which have been put by you on all who have become Christians by the name of Jesus, God shows shall be taken away from us, when He shall raise all men from the dead, and appoint some to be incorruptible, immortal, and free from sorrow in the everlasting and imperishable kingdom; but shall send others away to the everlasting punishment of fire. ​

“everlasting and imperishable kingdom” contrasted with “everlasting punishment.”

[13]Irenaeus Against Heresies. Book IV Chap. XX.
11. And drawing near to the Ancient of Days, and receiving from Him all power and glory, and a kingdom. “His dominion,” it is said, “is an everlasting dominion, and His kingdom shall not perish.”(Daniel 7:14) ​

“Everlasting dominion” paired with “shall not perish.”

[14]Address of Tatian to the Greeks. Chap. XIV
Therefore, what is now their chief distinction, that they do not die like men, they will retain when about to suffer punishment: they will not partake of everlasting life, so as to receive this instead of death in a blessed immortality. And as we, to whom it now easily happens to die, afterwards receive the immortal with enjoyment, or the painful with immortality, so the demons, who abuse the present life to purposes of wrong-doing, dying continually even while they live, will have hereafter the same immortality, like that which they had during the time they lived, but in its nature like that of men, who voluntarily performed what the demons prescribed to them during their lifetime. ​

“everlasting life” paired with “immortality/immortal”

[15]Clement of Alexandria Who Is the Rich Man that Shall Be Saved? Chap. XIX
Not at all. But by introducing, instead of what was formerly inherent in your soul, which you desire to save, other riches which deify and which minister everlasting life, dispositions in accordance with the command of God; for which there shall accrue to you endless reward and honour, and salvation, and everlasting immortality.​

“Everlasting life” is paired with “everlasting immortality.”

[16]Tertullian I. Apology. Chap. XLVIII.
Therefore after this there is neither death nor repeated resurrections, but we shall be the same that we are now, and still unchanged — the servants of God, ever with God, clothed upon with the proper substance of eternity; but the profane, and all who are not true worshippers of God, in like manner shall be consigned to the punishment of everlasting fire — that fire which, from its very nature indeed, directly ministers to their incorruptibility. ​

“eternity” is contrasted with “punishment of everlasting fire” which is paired with “incorrutability”.

[17]Origen De Principiis. Book II. Chap. X.
3. … there is yet given, in proportion to the dignity of his life and soul, a glory and dignity of body, - 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. ​

“everlasting fire” is paired with “so incorruptible, that it cannot be corrupted and dissolved.”

[18]Origen Against Celsus. Book IV. Chap. XVII.
… if he [Celsus] had reflected on what is appropriate51 to a soul which is to enjoy an everlasting life, and on the opinion which we are to form of its essence and principles, he would not so have ridiculed the entrance of the immortal into a mortal body, which took place not according to the metempsychosis of Plato, but agreeably to another and higher view of things. ​

“Everlasting life” is paired with “immortal.”

[19]The Extant Writings of Julius Africanus. III. Chap XIX
For, rather than be prevailed on, they chose to be beheaded, and suffered death: which death, being endured for the name of Christ, gained them temporal ignominy indeed among men of this earth, but everlasting honour and glory among the angels; and moving now among them, and exhibiting101 trophies of their sufferings, they enjoy eternal life with the King eternal in the heavens.”. ​

“Everlasting honor,””eternal life” and “king eternal” is contrasted with “temporal ignominy.”

[20]Methodius Oration on the Psalms.1
Blessed be God; let us proceed, brethren, from wonders to the miracles of the Lord, and as it were, from strength to strength. (Psa_84:8) For just as in a golden chain the links are so intimately joined and connected together, as that the one holds the other, and is fitted on to it, and so carries on the chain — even so the miracles that have been handed down by the holy Gospels, one after the other, lead on the Church of God, which delights in festivity, and refresh it, not with the meat that perisheth, [John 6:27] but with that which endureth unto everlasting life. ​

“Everlasting life” is contrasted with “meat that perishes.”

[21]Lactantius The Divine Institutes. Book III. Chap. IX.
Therefore it is not the world which is to be contemplated by the eye, for each is a body;33 but it is God who is to be contemplated by the soul: for God, being Himself immortal, willed that the soul also should be everlasting. ​

“Everlasting soul” is paired with “immortal.”

[22]The Divine Institutes. Book IV. Chap. XII
And they who stood by brought Him near100 before Him. And there was given unto Him a kingdom, and glory, and dominion; and all people, tribes, and languages shall serve Him: and His dominion is everlasting, ,[Daniel 7:14] which shall never pass away, and His kingdom shall not be destroyed.” How then do the Jews both confess and expect the Christ of God? ​

“Everlasting dominion” is paired with ‘shall never pass away” and “kingdom shall not be destroyed.

 

[JSRG]

Your reply,

But it especially wouldn't apply to Cyprian or Novatian as their works (and thus any quotations) were in Latin to begin with."​

What I said "Some of the following ECF writings exist only in Latin translated from an original Greek, which no longer exists, or were originally written in Latin."

But again, how does it make any sense to use a non-Greek text in which a different word is used to argue the meaning of aionios? Is the argument supposed to be that even if we don't have the Greek, we can assume that the word was used in it based on the translation? Because that seems awfully speculative. And the Latin texts can't be used at all, because there is no aionios in the language.

In fact, I don't think "aionios" is used even in some of the Greek texts you cite! Let's look at the first one:

[1]Ignatius [A.D. 30-107.] The Epistle to the RomansChap VII
David and Abraham; and I desire the drink of God, namely His blood, which is incorruptible love and eternal life.​

“Eternal life” is paired with “incorruptible love.”

I was curious so I looked up the Greek text (in Patrologia Series Graeca). The word translated as "eternal" here isn't aionios (αἰώνιος) at all, but rather ἀένναος (aennaos). Someone can verify that for themselves by looking at it here (see page 693; it's the second-to-last word under the VII heading). The Justin quote seems to be a different phrase than aionios also, but I'm less sure about that one.

Did you just search through the English translations of the early Christians for the word "eternal" and assumed that aionios was in the original text without checking?

 

[GenemZ]

But again, how does it make any sense to use a non-Greek text in which a different word is used to argue the meaning of aionios? Is the argument supposed to be that even if we don't have the Greek, we can assume that the word was used in it based on the translation? Because that seems awfully speculative. And the Latin texts can't be used at all, because there is no aionios in the language.

In fact, I don't think "aionios" is used even in some of the Greek texts you cite! Let's look at the first one:

I was curious so I looked up the Greek text (in Patrologia Series Graeca). The word translated as "eternal" here isn't aionios (αἰώνιος) at all, but rather ἀένναος (aennaos). Someone can verify that for themselves by looking at it here (see page 693; it's the second-to-last word under the VII heading). The Justin quote seems to be a different phrase than aionios also, but I'm less sure about that one.

Did you just search through the English translations of the early Christians for the word "eternal" and assumed that aionios was in the original text without checking?

What about idiomatic speech? Literal translations would mislead.

 

[Der Alte]

But again, how does it make any sense to use a non-Greek text in which a different word is used to argue the meaning of aionios? Is the argument supposed to be that even if we don't have the Greek, we can assume that the word was used in it based on the translation? Because that seems awfully speculative. And the Latin texts can't be used at all, because there is no aionios in the language.
In fact, I don't think "aionios" is used even in some of the Greek texts you cite! Let's look at the first one:
I was curious so I looked up the Greek text (in Patrologia Series Graeca). The word translated as "eternal" here isn't aionios (αἰώνιος) at all, but rather ἀένναος (aennaos). Someone can verify that for themselves by looking at it here (see page 693; it's the second-to-last word under the VII heading).
Did you just search through the English translations of the early Christians for the word "eternal" and assumed that aionios was in the original text without checking?

I appreciate your dogged persistence in trying to refute my posts. It keeps me on my toes. As I said before I think your arguments are not credible. I could not find ἀέναος but I did find ἀένναος in BDAG which means "eternal."
It really does not matter what word(s) you find. The ECF were writing about the NT if there is a reference to eternal life, eternal punishment, eternal God or any other noun which is modified by aionios in the NT, said nouns are defined in the quoted sources as "shall never pass away,""shall not perish,""shall not be destroyed,""immortal,""incorruptible,""infinite,""knows no beginning,""unchanging" etc. etc. Unless you want to argue that "aionios" life, punishment etc. are "age during" in the NT but "eternal" in the sources.
FYI I did a similar study of every occurrence of "aionios" and "aion" in the NT and found similar definitions modifying "aionios" in the NT.
…..For example, Jesus used the word “aiōnios” 30 times, He never used “αἰώνιος/aiōnios” to refer to something ordinary or mundane which was not/cannot be eternal. Aionios is translated eternal/everlasting life 25 times, fire 2 times, punishment, judgment and habitations 1 time each..
In the following 10 verses, Jesus, intentionally or not, defined/described “αἰώνιος/aiōnios” as “eternal” and “αἰών/aiōn” as “eternity.”
[1]John 6:58
(58) This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.[αἰώνιος/aiōnios]
In this verse Jesus juxtaposes “aiōnios life” with “death.” If “live aiōnios” is living only a finite period, that is not opposite “death.” Thus “aiōnios” by definition here means “eternal.”
[2-3]John 10:28-29
(28) I give them eternal [αἰώνιος/aiōnios] life, and they shall never [ου μη/ou mé] [αἰών/aiōn] perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.
(29) My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.
ου μη/ou mé, vs. 28, signifies “in nowise,””by no means,””never,” [fn below]. In these two verses Jesus parallels both “aiōnios” and “aiōn” with “eternal” with these three phrases, “[not] snatch them out of my hand,” “never perish,” and “no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.” If “aion/aiōnios” means “age(s), a finite period,” that is not the opposite of “never perish,[not] snatch them out of my hand/the father’s hand.”
[4-5]John 3:15-16
(15) That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal [αιωνιον] life.
(16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting [αιωνιον] life.
In these two verses Jesus parallels “aiōnion” with “should not perish,” twice. Believers could eventually perish in a finite period, thus by definition “aiōnion life” here means eternal/everlasting life.
[6]John 5:24
(24) Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting [αἰώνιος] life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
In this verse Jesus parallels “aiōnios” with the phrases “shall not come into condemnation” and “passed from death unto life.” “Aiōnios” does not mean “a finite period,” by definition here it means “eternal,” unless at some point, Jesus lets His followers come into condemnation and pass into death.
[7]John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting [αἰώνιος/aiōnios] life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
In this verse Jesus juxtaposes “aiōnios life” with “shall not see life.” If aiōnios means an indefinite age that is not opposite “shall not see life” By definition here aiōnios means eternal.
[8]EOB John 4:14 But whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never [ ου μη/ou mé][fn] be thirsty again. Not only this, the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal [αἰώνιος/aiōnios] life.”
Cleenewerck, L. (Ed.). (2011). The Easter/Greek Orthodox Bible:New Testament. (Jn 4:13–14). Laurent A. Cleenewerck.
In this verse Jesus parallels aiōnios with “shall never ου μη/ou mé thirst.” ου μη/ou mé means “in nowise, by no means,” [fn below] Aiōnios cannot mean an indefinite age that is not opposite “shall never thirst.” By definition aiōnios here means eternal.
[9]John 6:27
(27) Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting [αἰώνιος/aiōnios] life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.
In this verse Jesus juxtaposes “aiōnios meat” with “meat that perishes.” If aiōnios means an indefinite age that is not opposite “meat that perishes.” By definition aiōnios means eternal.
[10]John 8:51
(51) [αμην αμην/amen amen], I tell you; whoever keeps my word will never [ου μη εις τον αιωνα/ou mé eis ton aiōna] see death.”[1]Very truly I tell you, whoever obeys my word will never [ου μη εις τον αιωνα/ou mé eis ton aiōna][fn] see death."
In this verse Jesus parallels aion with "will never see death."
Cleenewerck, L. (Ed.). (2011). The Easter/Greek Orthodox Bible:New Testament.
[fn]● The double negative [ου μη/ou mé] signifies in nowise, by no means. Θεωρήσῃ[theōrésé], denoting steady, protracted vision, is purposely used, because the promise contemplates the entire course of the believer's life in Christ. It is not, shall not die forever, but shall live eternally.
Word Studies in the New Testament, Marvin Vincent.
● ④οὐ marker of reinforced negation, in combination w. μή, οὐ μή has the effect of strengthening the negation (Kühner-G. II 221–23; Schwyzer II 317; Mlt. 187–92 [a thorough treatment of NT usage]; B-D-F §365; RLudwig: D. prophet. Wort 31 ’37, 272–79; JLee, NovT 27, ’85, 18–23; B-D-F §365.—Pla., Hdt. et al. [Kühner-G. loc. cit.]; SIG 1042, 16; POxy 119, 5, 14f; 903, 16; PGM 5, 279; 13, 321; LXX; TestAbr A 8 p. 85, 11 [Stone p. 46]; JosAs 20:3; GrBar 1:7; ApcEsdr 2:7; Just., D. 141, 2). οὐ μή is the most decisive way of negativing something in the future.
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000)A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian Literature.(3rd Ed). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
● The combinations with οὐ μή also be noticed as, ουδεν οὐ μή (Lu. 10:19); οὐ μή σε άνο ουδ ου σε εγκαταιπο (Heb. 13:5); ουκετι οὐ μή (Rev. 18:14). There is no denying the power of this accumulation of negatives. Cf. the English hymn "I'll never, no never, no never forsake."
Grammar Of The Greek New Testament In The Light Of Historical Research
By A. T. Robertson, M.A., D.D., Ll.D., Litt.D. p.1165.

 

[JSRG]

I appreciate your dogged persistence in trying to refute my posts.

I'm not trying to refute your posts. I mostly stay out of the various arguments about universalism here; I may peruse the arguments about universalism but normally stay out of them unless I see a particularly bad point made, in which case I'll respond to that particular point. And that's the case here: Some of your specific arguments don't make any sense because they're citing the early Christians as using "aionios" when they're not using the word at all!

It keeps me on my toes. As I said before I think your arguments are not credible. I could not find ἀέναος but I did find ἀένναος in BDAG which means "eternal."

Well, yeah... because it was ἀένναος that was used. That's what I said. I'm not sure where you got the idea of ἀέναος from. I never wrote that.

It really does not matter what word(s) you find.

Yes, it matters a heck of a lot when your argument revolves entirely around a particular word! Your argument is about that "aionios" should be taken to be mean everlasting in the New Testament, and one of your sub-arguments is to cite various instances of the word being used by the early Christians. But a good number of your "examples" aren't them using aionios at all! If you're trying to make some general point about the concept of eternity you could maybe use them, but you can't be plausibly trying to argue about the meaning of aionios when the citations supposedly showing usage of it don't use the word. Not to mention it's rather poor research on your part to do so.

 

[Der Alte]

I'm not trying to refute your posts. I mostly stay out of the various arguments about universalism here; I may peruse the arguments about universalism but normally stay out of them unless I see a particularly bad point made, in which case I'll respond to that particular point. And that's the case here: Some of your specific arguments don't make any sense because they're citing the early Christians as using "aionios" when they're not using the word at all!
Well, yeah... because it was ἀένναος that was used. That's what I said. I'm not sure where you got the idea of ἀέναος from. I never wrote that.
Yes, it matters a heck of a lot when your argument revolves entirely around a particular word! Your argument is about that "aionios" should be taken to be mean everlasting in the New Testament, and one of your sub-arguments is to cite various instances of the word being used by the early Christians. But a good number of your "examples" aren't them using aionios at all! If you're trying to make some general point about the concept of eternity you could maybe use them, but you can't be plausibly trying to argue about the meaning of aionios when the citations supposedly showing usage of it don't use the word. Not to mention it's rather poor research on your part to do so.

I will make a tiny modification to cover your nit picking. The ECF were writing about, often quoting or referring to specific NT scriptures. Some of those ECF writings were translated into Latin then English and many of the original Greek mss no longer exist. Other ECf writings were originally written in Latin, they also were written about often quoting or referring to specific NT scriptures.
The ECF writings, whether Greek or Latin, document that the early church understood that "aionios" in the NT meant eternal/everlasting.
Actually you said "aenos" with only one nu. That is what I intended to write.

 

[JSRG]

I will make a tiny modification to cover your nit picking. The ECF were writing about, often quoting or referring to specific NT scriptures. Some of those ECF writings were translated into Latin then English and many of the original Greek mss no longer exist. Other ECf writings were originally written in Latin, they also were written about often quoting or referring to specific NT scriptures.
The ECF writings, whether Greek or Latin, document that the early church understood that "aionios" in the NT meant eternal/everlasting.

If you want to argue that, fine. No skin off my nose. But you should clip out all of your "examples" where (1) the text is in Latin and thus is not using "aionios", (2) the text only survives in Latin and thus any idea that "aionios" was in the original Greek is speculation, or (3) while the text is in Greek, the word "aionios" isn't being used at all. Because a good number of your examples fall into that category. You can try to make your argument on the meaning of "aionios" without erroneously using quotes that don't actually use the word.

It's very puzzling to me why you're resisting this so much. I was expecting a simple "whoops, my bad, I'll remove those examples, I'll try to do a better job verifying these next time" as your answer, not doubling down on the errors.

Actually you said "aenos" with only one nu. That is what I intended to write.

No, here's what I said:

I was curious so I looked up the Greek text (in Patrologia Series Graeca). The word translated as "eternal" here isn't aionios (αἰώνιος) at all, but rather ἀένναος (aennaos). Someone can verify that for themselves by looking at it here (see page 693; it's the second-to-last word under the VII heading). The Justin quote seems to be a different phrase than aionios also, but I'm less sure about that one.

I clearly used two nu's, both in the Greek text (ἀένναος) and in the transliteration (aennaos).

 

[Der Alte]

If you want to argue that, fine. No skin off my nose. But you should clip out all of your "examples" where (1) the text is in Latin and thus is not using "aionios", (2) the text only survives in Latin and thus any idea that "aionios" was in the original Greek is speculation, or (3) while the text is in Greek, the word "aionios" isn't being used at all. Because a good number of your examples fall into that category. You can try to make your argument on the meaning of "aionios" without erroneously using quotes that don't actually use the word.
It's very puzzling to me why you're resisting this so much. I was expecting a simple "whoops, my bad, I'll remove those examples, I'll try to do a better job verifying these next time" as your answer, not doubling down on the errors.

Not doubling down at all I said I would make some changes. I have changed my lead paragraph to read.

The writings of the ECF quote or refer to specific NT scripture. Some of the following ECF writings were originally written in Greek, translated into Latin then English and many of the original Greek mss. no longer exist. Others were originally written in Latin. These citations, whether originally Greek or Latin, document that the early church understood the Greek word “aionios” in the NT to mean “eternal/everlasting.”​

No, here's what I said:
I clearly used two nu's, both in the Greek text (ἀένναος) and in the transliteration (aennaos).

I misread it I was looking for aenaos, w/ 1 nu.

 

[Paul Stewart Reid]

[Previous post continued]

[13]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 [aidios] power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
[14]Romans 16:26
(26) But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting [aionios] God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:​

In Rom 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, the same writer, in the same writing, refers to God as “aionios.” Paul has used “aidios” synonymous with “aionios.” In this verse by definition “aionios” means eternal, everlasting.

[15]2 Corinthians 4:17-18
(17) For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal [aionios] weight of glory;
(18) While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal;[proskairos] but the things which are not seen are eternal [aionios]​

In this passage Paul contrasts “aionios” with “for a moment,” vs. 4, and “temporal,” vs. 5. “Age(s)” an indeterminate finite period, it is not the opposite of “for a moment”/”temporal/temporary” “eternal” is. “Aionios” by definition here means “eternal.”

[16]2 Corinthians 5:1
(1) For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal [aionios] in the heavens.​

In this verse Paul contrasts “aionios house” with “earthly house which is destroyed.” Is God going to replace our destroyed earthly house with a house which only lasts a little longer and will be destroyed at the end of an age? The aionios house is not destroyed, the opposite of “is destroyed.” Thus, “aionios” by definition here means “eternal.”

[17]1 Timothy 6:16
(16) Who only hath immortality, [aphthartos] dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting [aionios] ​

In this verse “aionios” Paul paired with “immortality.” If “aionios” is only a finite period, God cannot be “immortal” and only exist for a finite period at the same time. Thus “aionios” by definition means “eternal.”

[18]Galatians 6:8
(8) For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; [fthora] but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. [aionios] ​

In this verse Paul contrasts “aionios” with “corruption.” “Fleshly” people reap “corruption” but spiritual people reap “life aionios,” i.e. “not corruption.” “Age(s), a finite period, is not opposite of “corruption.” Thus “aionios life” by definition here means “eternal/everlasting life.”

[19]Romans 2:7
(7) To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, [apftharsia] he will give eternal [aionios] life. ​

In this verse Paul pairs “aionios” with “immortality.” If “aionios” is only a finite period, believers do not seek for “a finite period,” and “immortality” at the same time. But they can seek for “eternal life” and “immortality” at the same time. Thus by definition “aionios life” here means “eternal life.”

[20]1 Timothy 1:17.
(17) Now unto the King eternal, [aion] immortal, [aphthartos] invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever [aion] and ever [aionios]. Amen. ​

In this verse Paul pairs “aion” with “immortal.” “Aion” cannot mean “age(s),” a finite period and immortal at the same time. Thus “aion” by definition here means “eternal.”

[21]Romans 5:21
(21) That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal [aionios] life by Jesus Christ our Lord. ​

In this verse Paul contrasts “aionios life” with death. “A finite period life” is not opposite death. “Aionios life” by definition here means ‘eternal life.”

[22]Ephesians 3:21
(21) to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever [tou aionios] and ever! [ton aionion] Amen. ​

In this verse Paul paired “tou aionios ton aionion” with “throughout all generations.” "Age(s)" a finite period cannot refer to "all generations." By definition “tou aionios ton aionion” means forever and ever.

[23]Hebrews 7:24 but because Jesus lives forever [aion] he has an unchangeable [aparabatos] priesthood.​

In this verse “aion” is paired with “unchangeable.” If “aion” means “age(s),” Jesus cannot continue “for a finite period” and be “unchangeable” at the same time. Thus “aion” by definition here means “eternal.”

[24]1 Peter 1:23
(23) For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, [aphthartos] through the living and enduring word of God. …
1 Peter 1:25
(25) but the word of the Lord endures forever.[aion] " And this is the word that was preached to you.​

In verse 23 Peter pairs “word of God” with “imperishable.” The same writer, Peter, in the same writing 1 Peter, in verse 25 writes the word of God “endures eis ton aiona/unto eternity. ” The word of God is not a finite age long but imperishable. Thus by definition “aion” here means “eternity”

[25]1 Peter 5:10
(10) And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal [aionion] glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, [oligon] will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.​

In this verse Peter contrasted “aionios” with “little while” Does Jesus give His followers a finite period of glory then they eventually die? Thus “aionios” here, by definition, means “eternal.”

[26]Revelation 14:11
(11) And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever:[eis aionas aionon] and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.​

In this verse “aionas aionon torment” is paired with “no rest day or night.” If “aionas, aionon” means “a finite period” at some time they would rest, “Aionas, aionon” by definition here means “forever and forever.”

Thanks for this clear and detailed explanation of the meaning of this word set. I am doing a similar study of the NT Greek passages using these words (αἰώνων, αἰών ...) and found much overlap and agreement with your study. I did this because of the claims others have made that suggest that "eternal" used for "aionion" is a subversion of the true meaning of the word. It is refreshing to see this kind of clarity in the face of partially researched, not researched, claims that are not substantiated or those who leave out verses that go against their claims (mainly that this word doesn't mean "eternal."
This is my first time on this forum and I'm not going to post any work I have done yet until I am more familiar with the audience and nature of the site. Also, I am still working on this little project. I was a little uncertain about posting my work here by one suggestion that your work was too long ... . Wanted to say thanks for doing good work, thorough work.

 

[Der Alte]

Thanks for this clear and detailed explanation of the meaning of this word set. I am doing a similar study of the NT Greek passages using these words (αἰώνων, αἰών ...) and found much overlap and agreement with your study. I did this because of the claims others have made that suggest that "eternal" used for "aionion" is a subversion of the true meaning of the word. It is refreshing to see this kind of clarity in the face of partially researched, not researched, claims that are not substantiated or those who leave out verses that go against their claims (mainly that this word doesn't mean "eternal."
This is my first time on this forum and I'm not going to post any work I have done yet until I am more familiar with the audience and nature of the site. Also, I am still working on this little project. I was a little uncertain about posting my work here by one suggestion that your work was too long ... . Wanted to say thanks for doing good work, thorough work.

Thank you, your post is one of the few supportive posts. You mentioned complaints about my posts being too long. I have noticed that some of those who made those complaints have no problem posting overly long posts themselves and as you said poorly researched or not researched at all. Them other folk are fond of quoting Universal Reconciliation [UR] "scholars" in opposition to scripture.