What Does Aionios Mean? (part 2, It is wrong to define aionios based on aion)

[Der Alte]

As Jesus says, Yahweh Jesus' Father is Pleased to hide Salvation from the scholars. It is His Good Pleasure to Do . Thus, unless someone has some other criteria or hope or way to get Yahweh to grant understanding of Salvation , it is not granted nor known nor understood.

I agree, however the world seems to be fraught with folks with less than honorable intent who want to mislead people challenging orthodox teaching by telling the unwary what the Bible "really" says, what specific critical words "really" mean.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I agree, however the world seems to be fraught with folks with less than honorable intent who want to mislead people challenging orthodox teaching by telling the unwary what the Bible "really" says, what specific critical words "really" mean.

Yes.... the world, the forum, the churches, the governments, the teachers, etc etc etc
"all society" is deadly, death dealing, and under a death sentence by Yahweh.
i.e. NOT to be trusted. (even though many are raised and taught to trust their parents, pastors, teachers, police, doctors and so on ..... the truth is rare and hard to find, and not welcome by the world nor by the powers that control religion, finance, military, and so on ..... and all corporations .... ) .....

 

[ClementofA]

As Jesus says, Yahweh Jesus' Father is Pleased to hide Salvation from the scholars. It is His Good Pleasure to Do . Thus, unless someone has some other criteria or hope or way to get Yahweh to grant understanding of Salvation , it is not granted nor known nor understood.

I agree, however the world seems to be fraught with folks with less than honorable intent who want to mislead people challenging orthodox teaching by telling the unwary what the Bible "really" says, what specific critical words "really" mean.

What defines "orthodox teaching"? The majority? The "orthodox" church? RCC? Others amongst the 100's of denominations existing in the past 1990 years? Are most Christians today "hopeful universalists"? Was universalism ever a majority view in the first several centuries of the early church:

https://www.christianforums.com/thr...niversalism-since-early-church-times.8042013/

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unfund...017/04/indeed-many-universalism-early-church/

 

[ClementofA]

Get some new material, instead of posting the same copy/pastes over and over.

That remark is more applicable to yourself, not anyone who's been following my posts while simultaneously objective & sober.

That's easy to say, but where is your list of these alleged "sources"?
As for "Larry Beauchamin", i don't know who that is & don't recall ever posting anything quoting such an author. Perhaps you meant Gerry Beauchemin who wrote the following:
You know who I was talking about. The difference is I am talking to you stating my opinion. Unlike you and Beauchamin nobody is quoting me as an authority on anything.

Who ever said he is an "authority"? Both of you are amateur compilers.

If Beauchamin quotes an accredited scholar, quote the scholar and leave Beauchamin out of it.

When did i ever quote him?

OBTW have you verified every "scholar" Beauchamin quoted as you demanded of me?

Verified how?

Or do you just accept everything he says on blind faith as you accused me of with BDAG?

You yourself implied as much. You haven't even studied the cites he gives to see for yourself if you agree with them.

Like you, he has no "expertise in Biblical languages or Bible history", but that doesn't keep either of you from posting or compiling quotes of those who do. So pot-kettle as far as your remark on that is concerned

.
Wrong! I am expressing my considered opinion in a discussion nobody is quoting me as an authority.

Who ever quoted him as an "authority"? Not I.

 

[ClementofA]

<ClemA>Do you want me to guess how your often illogically thinking brain got it wrong again?
Congrats on your - blind - faith in a guy named Danker. Others prefer to put their - both eyes closed - faith in one of the Pontiffs or Old Slewfoot.
I've already posted many remarks in opposition to many of the BDAG cites conclusions. I have done this with facts, info from scholars, ECF, logic & Scripture, etc. I have also quoted scholars who remark upon the weaknesses, errors & inadequacies of lexicons in general, including BDAG.
Why doesn't BDAG list the following dozens of "ancient sources cited under aionios"? Did the author purposely omit them to weigh the evidence according to his biases? To sell books?
Ask yourself the same regarding the following you posted from BDAG.
You & Danker have provided - no evidence - that any of those references should be interpreted to mean "pert. to a period of unending duration, without end". Anyone can post a bunch of references & make all kinds of claims about what they mean. Proving it from context is something else completely. And, BTW, lexicons & scholars are often in disagreement with each other re aionios. Even those that are biased to endless hell are in much disharmony amongst themselves on various points re aionios.
Furthermore, the dishonesty of Danker can be seen in his only cite of Origen above under aionios saying "in the Reign of God: ζωὴ αἰ. (Orig., C. Cels. 2, 77, 3)", while ignoring all Origen's references to aionios that are finite, as i've documented here:
BDAG's entry above re aionios has many cites from Diodorus Siculus, Philo & Josephus. There again Danker omits examples where such authors use aionios of finite duration. For example, see the reference to Philo at the above url.
Moreover you have your rare theory that aion & aionios always mean eternal unless used in hyperbole. Generally scholars, including BDAG, oppose your opinion.<end>
This discussion is over. You, with zero formal education or expertise in Koine Greek, who probably could not parse a Greek verb if your life depended on it, have set yourself up as an expert,

Actually, as i said above, i base my views on "facts, info from scholars, ECF, logic & Scripture, etc." You try to do much the same, but we obviously interpret the data differently.

on one hand quoting anonymous online amateurs

Define amateur. Did you not quote from Gill & Barnes today? Did you not create your own rare theory re aion & aionios always meaning eternal (except in hyperbole), that the past 2000 years of scholarship opposes?

on the other hand criticizing and rejecting out-of-hand Bauer, Danker, Arndt and Gingrich [BDAG] one of, if not, the most highly accredited Greek lexicons available.

That doesn't make it perfect like an infallible pontiff throughout every one of hundreds of detailed word entries. In particular regarding the entry re aionios, which many other scholars have had points of disagreement with.

BDAG has been peer reviewed by many Greek scholars for more than one hundred years.

BDAG was only published in 2000. And you've never provided a single critical review of it re the word aionios.

Do not expect any further responses I'm not wasting any more of my time.

Time would be better spent in a critical objective examination of its entries rather than kissing its feet.

And why bother when you can't refute - anything - i post, while many of your arguments are demolished. Quit before it gets any worse. I agree.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

What defines "orthodox teaching"? The majority? The "orthodox" church? RCC? Others amongst the 100's of denominations existing in the past 1990 years? Are most Christians today "hopeful universalists"? Was universalism ever a majority view in the first several centuries of the early church:

It doesn't matter.
Yahweh won't take away yours or anyone's free will to continue in error, no matter if many or few.