Why are so many Christians against annihilation in hell when scripture supports it?

[Dorothy Mae]

There will indeed be torment in hell, very painful, but it will not be eternal, it will be momentary. God in his authority has already predestined who will be thrown in the lake of fire before the foundation of the world, it would be nonsensical for God to consign most of mankind to eternal torment, when the true purpose of Hell is to render death in a very painful way unto those God appointed to be sinners, so that through them he may demonstrate his wrath, power, and judgment; where after these things have been shown, they serve no other purpose but to cease to exist as quickly as they came into existence, hence "the wicked are like the chaff that the wind blows away" and the "wicked will become ashes under the feet of the righteous". The punishment for sin is death, not eternal torment. The doctrine of eternal torment is a serious misunderstanding of the nature of God and contrary to what the scriptures teach.

Your god is cruel and unjust. You are likely a Calvinist.

 

[cwo]

Except the account mentions Lazarus by name, something no parable does.

In scripture names have very significant meanings. For example, the name Yeshua, means "YHVH delivers", which is why the angel said, "for he shall deliver his people from their sins", after revealing what the name of Christ would be. And in relation to this, the significance of the meaning of names, a name was used in this parable to convey a truth behind the meaning of the name Lazarus. If you do your homework, you will come to find that Lazarus is the Greek name for the Hebrew name Eliezer, who was a servant in the household of Abram. This is not a coincidence. Because what the parable is trying to convey is that Eliezer, who was not to be Abram's heir,

And Abram says, Master, O LORD, what will you give to me, for I am wasting away childless, but the son of Masek of my native-born maid servant, this Damascus Eliezer is heir? (Genesis 15:2 [ABP])

Then the word of the LORD came to him: “This man will not be your heir, but a son who is your own flesh and blood will be your heir.” (Genesis 15:4 [NIV])

Inherited the promises of Abraham, whereas the rich man, who was Jewish, which is why he calls Abraham father,

So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham…’ (Luke 16:24 [NIV])

Did not, even though it was unto the Jews that the promises of Abraham were given to. Its because these two men symbolize two types of people, the Jews, who had Abraham as father, along with the Law and the Prophets, which is symbolized by the rich man, and then the Gentiles, who were alienated from the promises of the Jews, which was symbolized by Lazarus/Eliezer,

Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (which is done in the body by human hands)– remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. (Ephesians 2:11-12 [NIV])

Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” (Galatians 3:7 -8[ESV])

Now if we are children, then we are heirs–heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory. (Romans 8:17 [NIV])

 

[cwo]

Your god is cruel and unjust. You are likely a Calvinist.

Which is more cruel,

1. Being burned alive endlessly for all eternity.
OR
2. God in his own authority choosing who he will destroy, so that through their destruction he may reveal his power and judgment, that ends in their cessation of existence. Their purpose of existence was merely to show these characteristics of God.

Another example could be, which is more cruel,
1. Punishing someone to endless painful electrocution that never ends in death.
OR
2. Punishing someone to die by electrocution quickly.

 

[Rubiks]

Except the account mentions Lazarus by name, something no parable does.

You're assuming its not a parable to prove its not a parable.

 

[he-man]

Yet you've failed to provide any evidence or argument in support of your claim that aionios is used in hyperbole in Rom.16:25. Doing that anyone can make the Bible say anything they want it to. They can claim aionios is used in hyperbole in Mt.25:46.
What point would that be? Why have you - never - been able to cite a single source that agrees that aionios is - ever - used in hyperbole in the NT, Greek OT, Koine Greek, or any ancient Greek language? Let alone in Rom.16:25. BDAG's entries re aion & aionios never mention hyperbole. Instead Danker lists Rom.16:25 under the category of "pert. to a long period of time, long ago...long ages ago Ro 16 25" (p.33). Evidently in agreement with what Oldmantook posted.

What part of ever do you not understand?
Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, [aiōnios G166 From G165] KJV
αἰώνιος aiōnios From G165; perpetual - eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).

[eternal G166 ABP+] which was kept secret since the world began, or "from eternal times": [GILL]
The phrase “since the world began” is in Greek, “in eternal times;” [BARNES]

Mat 6:13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever.[αἰών aiōn From G165; without end, perpetual - eternal, for ever,] Amen.

Revelation 22:5 ...they shall reign for ever and ever. G165 G165; Revelation 19:3 her smoke rose up for ever and ever. G165 G165 Revelation 15:7 ...of the wrath of God, who liveth for ever and ever. G165 G165

 

[he-man]

Except the account mentions Lazarus by name, something no parable does.

It is a story to show that once you are dead nothing you can do will allow you to get into heaven.

Luke 16:26　 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.　
Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into the everlasting penalty: but the righteous into life eternal.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

It is a story to show that once you are dead nothing you can do will allow you to get into heaven.

Luke 16:26　 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.　
Matthew 25:46 And these shall go away into the everlasting penalty: but the righteous into life eternal.

If it never happened to real men, it teaches us nothing. All of the parables are stories that could have happened to real people, no question. There are no names mentioned because none are needed. The account of Lazaraus tells of suffering or comfort after death. No question. If this never happened to real men, it teaches us nothing. It is as valuable as Cinderella when telling young women how to find a nice man.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

You're assuming its not a parable to prove its not a parable.

No, I am assuming when names are mentioned, it is not a parable. No names are even mentioned in parables. And no parables talk of states of man's being that common people can not see as really happening or have happened.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Which is more cruel,

1. Being burned alive endlessly for all eternity.
OR
2. God in his own authority choosing who he will destroy, so that through their destruction he may reveal his power and judgment, that ends in their cessation of existence. Their purpose of existence was merely to show these characteristics of God.

God deciding for no reason before men are born and givng them no chance to repent is more cruel than the Devil. Sorry but he hates all men equally. Only the god of Calvin hates some and loves others for no reason whatsoever. How justice is carried out in his eyes is not a part of this but frankly speaking, your examples remind me of the question, do you walk to work or carry your lunch?

Another example could be, which is more cruel,
1. Punishing someone to endless painful electrocution that never ends in death.
OR
2. Punishing someone to die by electrocution quickly.

How about deciding some are going to be punished before they were born?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

In scripture names have very significant meanings. For example, the name Yeshua, means "YHVH delivers", which is why the angel said, "for he shall deliver his people from their sins", after revealing what the name of Christ would be. And in relation to this, the significance of the meaning of names, a name was used in this parable to convey a truth behind the meaning of the name Lazarus. If you do your homework, you will come to find that Lazarus is the Greek name for the Hebrew name Eliezer, who was a servant in the household of Abram. This is not a coincidence. Because what the parable is trying to convey is that Eliezer, who was not to be Abram's heir,

And Abram says, Master, O LORD, what will you give to me, for I am wasting away childless, but the son of Masek of my native-born maid servant, this Damascus Eliezer is heir? (Genesis 15:2 [ABP])

Then the word of the LORD came to him: “This man will not be your heir, but a son who is your own flesh and blood will be your heir.” (Genesis 15:4 [NIV])

Inherited the promises of Abraham, whereas the rich man, who was Jewish, which is why he calls Abraham father,

So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham…’ (Luke 16:24 [NIV])

Did not, even though it was unto the Jews that the promises of Abraham were given to. Its because these two men symbolize two types of people, the Jews, who had Abraham as father, along with the Law and the Prophets, which is symbolized by the rich man, and then the Gentiles, who were alienated from the promises of the Jews, which was symbolized by Lazarus/Eliezer,

Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (which is done in the body by human hands)– remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. (Ephesians 2:11-12 [NIV])

Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” (Galatians 3:7 -8[ESV])

Now if we are children, then we are heirs–heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory. (Romans 8:17 [NIV])

Your "explanation" reminds of someone I know who made up a legend before my eyes before a waitress. I can do it too.

You know, the first letters of names are very significant in the Bible. It is the first letter you see and so of most important. Now Lazarus starts with L. That L stands for love. That is the point of the account. Jesus was telling us that we are like Lazarus held in the bosom of God who loves us. We are not to be troubled by the rich man, whose designation starts with r meaning rubbish. We are to feel warm and safe and close to the Father, like father Abraham so called by the rubbish man, because we are loved like Lazarus. That was the point Jesus was trying to make.

How about that? Made up before your very eyes. Sound convincing. I can do this all day.

Lazarus was a real man and so was the rich m an who still had living brothers. The places where they went after death are real and so is the suffering or comfort they experienced. That is the real point of the teaching and it matches all the other teachings Jesus had on eternal punishment after this life, whatever you want to call it, Hades, Hell, Gehenna, or Never never land cause you never never get out.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Jeremiah 31:36

“If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.”


Jeremiah 31:35

“Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name:”

This is a bit of what I mean. Just Bible quotes. I mean does this mean the author has no thoughts on this? Or do they think none of us know the Bible at all? Whatever it is, you will not find anyone in the Bible who just went around quoting others, not even quoting the Word of God as all that they ever said. They all, to a man, had thoughts. IT is a part of loving God with your mind, not merely your memory files.

 

[cwo]

God deciding for no reason before men are born and givng them no chance to repent is more cruel than the Devil. Sorry but he hates all men equally. Only the god of Calvin hates some and loves others for no reason whatsoever. How justice is carried out in his eyes is not a part of this but frankly speaking, your examples remind me of the question, do you walk to work or carry your lunch?
How about deciding some are going to be punished before they were born?

You accuse God of being cruel for having the authority to make one pot he wants to keep and a second another he doesn't want to keep, not realizing that your own theology that God would condemn men to endless eternal torment is actually more cruel. Without regard of who chose who, and whether predestination is true, electrocution for one hundred years is far worse than electrocution for one minute, and one hundred years isn't even a drop in the bucket in comparison to "endless torment". The very people that accuse God of cruelty for choosing are themselves more cruel by thinking that burning "endlessly" is somehow a righteous punishment.

 

[DeaconDean]

Only the god of Calvin hates some and loves others

Just exactly what do you mean by that quip?

And please choose your words wisely:

"When speaking about well-known, revered and highly regarded past or present leaders, theologians, saints (living or deceased) of other Nicene Christian denominations, please show a measure of respect. These public religious figures are respected by the members who belong to those denominations. Please avoid using inflammatory words or phrases in reference to these public religious figures.

Examples of inflammatory words/phrases (including but not limited to): idolaters, false/different/other gospel, false prophet, false doctrine, heretics, blasphemers, evil, sheep in wolves clothing, different God, antichrists, Antichrist, cannibalism/cannibal (concerning Eucharist), Judaizer."

Link to this rule.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[cwo]

Your "explanation" reminds of someone I know who made up a legend before my eyes before a waitress. I can do it too.

You know, the first letters of names are very significant in the Bible. It is the first letter you see and so of most important. Now Lazarus starts with L. That L stands for love. That is the point of the account. Jesus was telling us that we are like Lazarus held in the bosom of God who loves us. We are not to be troubled by the rich man, whose designation starts with r meaning rubbish. We are to feel warm and safe and close to the Father, like father Abraham so called by the rubbish man, because we are loved like Lazarus. That was the point Jesus was trying to make.

How about that? Made up before your very eyes. Sound convincing. I can do this all day.

Lazarus was a real man and so was the rich m an who still had living brothers. The places where they went after death are real and so is the suffering or comfort they experienced. That is the real point of the teaching and it matches all the other teachings Jesus had on eternal punishment after this life, whatever you want to call it, Hades, Hell, Gehenna, or Never never land cause you never never get out.

Studying the meaning of a name is not an arbitrary way to study scripture as you have craftily tried to compare it in your nonsensical example of arbitrarily grabbing a letter in the name and arbitrarily connecting it to a word. If a true Lazarus were already alive and well with Abraham, there would be no need for a resurrection. If a true rich man were already in the lake of fire, there would be no need for a future resurrection to cast the dead into the lake of fire. According to you they're already there, but because of lack of understanding, you don't understand how taking the parable literally miscontrues the truth contrary to many scriptures.

 

[DeaconDean]

The so-called theory of "double-predestination, was not formed by John Calvin as many think. In fact, it was first proposed at least one (1) millennia before him.

"Augustine did in fact, hold to a "form" of "double predestination" (as most Catholics define it) saying: "Therefore what I said a little afterwards: ‘For as in those whom God elects it is not works but faith that begins the merit so as to do good works by the gift of God, so in those whom He condemns, unbelief and impiety begin the merit of punishment, so that even by way of punishment itself they do evil works’—I spoke most truly." (emphasis here where Augustine admits to believing in a form of "double predestination)"

"On the Predestination of the Saints, Book I (Augustine), Book I, Chapter 7"

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

because it doesn't..

 

[he-man]

If it never happened to real men, it teaches us nothing. All of the parables are stories that could have happened to real people, no question. There are no names mentioned because none are needed. The account of Lazaraus tells of suffering or comfort after death. No question. If this never happened to real men, it teaches us nothing. It is as valuable as Cinderella when telling young women how to find a nice man.

What it teaches is Luke 16:26 the same as Ecclesiastes 9:5 once you are dead their is nothing you can do about changing you ways to heaven. Whatever you sow you shall reap. Matthew 7:21 not all shall enter the Kingdom of God

 

[narrowgateevangelist]

Matthew 16: 6. Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.


Sadducees leavening in the current age. Is, "Hell isn't forever. God isn't cruel. He'll let you off time served. Then you're annihilated. That's what youuuu wanted anyway, right?."

Pharisee leavening is, "One must perform this, this, and this to be redeemed. If you don't perform this, this, and this forever. Your redemption is void. So be afraid of your shadow forever."

God's grace and faithfulness are empty in both camps. His grace and faithfulness has never been in the possession of fallible man.

 

[Der Alte]

begin

<cwo>Need I discredit the lexicon or be an expert in linguistics to derive a logical conclusion that an adjective relates to its noun counterpart in scope? Some things aeonial are without end, because they are declared so independently, because aeonial does not imply without end, such as the example of aeonial hills, where hills are not eternal, they are aeonial, yet the aeonial life received by the elect is without end, because in a separate passage we read that these never die again, so it is both aeonial life and life without end (two different things). All angels have aeonial life, but those who sinned will eventually die like men, ending their aeonial life.<end>

end

There is a lexical fallacy known as Root fallacy: assigning the (supposed) original meaning of a word to its usages throughout history. I must ask this question again, how many semesters or credit hours of Greek do you have?
.....Do you honestly think you know something about Greek that the scholars who compiled the BDAG do not know? They bring to the table about 120-200 years of scholarship? If there was such a rule as you have stated do you think those scholars did not know about it or deliberately ignored it?
.....It is believed that Plato coined the adjective "aionios" because it first occurs in his writings. 20 bce-40 ce,

In “aion” Philo declares then, “nothing is past nor future but only present.” …”In aion there is no change”​

https://books.google.com/books?id=5...-kQ6AEISTAD#v=onepage&q=philo aionios&f=false
.....Here is the definition of aionios from BAGD again. Please observe the many sources they used to determine the meaning are highlighted in blue. When you can bring that level of scholarship to the discussion then your opinion might have merit.

αἰώνιος (ία ③ pert. to a period of unending duration, without end (Diod S 1, 1, 5; 5, 73, 1; 15, 66, 1 δόξα αἰ. everlasting fame; in Diod S 1, 93, 1 the Egyptian dead are said to have passed to their αἰ. οἴκησις; Arrian, Peripl. 1, 4 ἐς μνήμην αἰ.; Jos., Bell. 4, 461 αἰ. χάρις=a benefaction for all future time; OGI 383, 10 [I b.c.] εἰς χρόνον αἰ.; EOwen, οἶκος αἰ.: JTS 38, ’37, 248–50; EStommel, Domus Aeterna: RAC IV 109–28) of the next life σκηναὶ αἰ. Lk 16:9 (cp. En 39:5). οἰκία, contrasted w. the οἰκία ἐπίγειος, of the glorified body 2 Cor 5:1. διαθήκη (Gen 9:16; 17:7; Lev 24:8; 2 Km 23:5 al.; PsSol 10:4 al.) Hb 13:20. εὐαγγέλιον Rv 14:6; κράτος in a doxolog. formula (=εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας) 1 Ti 6:16. παράκλησις 2 Th 2:16. λύτρωσις Hb 9:12. κληρονομία (Esth 4:17m) vs. 15; AcPl Ha 8, 21. αἰ. ἀπέχειν τινά (opp. πρὸς ὥραν) keep someone forever Phlm 15 (cp. Job 40:28). Very often of God’s judgment (Diod S 4, 63, 4 διὰ τὴν ἀσέβειαν ἐν ᾅδου διατελεῖν τιμωρίας αἰωνίου τυγχάνοντα; similarly 4, 69, 5; Jer 23:40; Da 12:2; Ps 76:6; 4 Macc 9:9; 13:15) κόλασις αἰ. (TestReub 5:5) Mt 25:46; 2 Cl 6:7; κρίμα αἰ. Hb 6:2 (cp. κρίσις αἰ. En 104:5). θάνατος B 20:1. ὄλεθρον (4 Macc 10:15) 2 Th 1:9. πῦρ (4 Macc 12:12; GrBar 4:16.—SibOr 8, 401 φῶς αἰ.) Mt 18:8; 25:41; Jd 7; Dg 10:7 (cp. 1QS 2:8). ἁμάρτημα Mk 3:29 (v.l. κρίσεως, κολάσεω, and ἁμαρτίας). On the other hand, of eternal life (Maximus Tyr. 6, 1d θεοῦ ζωὴ αἰ.; Diod S 8, 15, 3 life μετὰ τὸν θάνατον lasts εἰς ἅπαντα αἰῶνα; Da 12:2; 4 Macc 15:3;PsSol PsSol 3:12; OdeSol 11:16c; JosAs 8:11 cod. A [p. 50, 2 Bat.]; Philo, Fuga 78; Jos., Bell. 1, 650; SibOr 2, 336) in the Reign of God: ζωὴ αἰ. (Orig., C. Cels. 2, 77, 3) Mt 19:16, 29; 25:46; Mk 10:17, 30; Lk 10:25; 18:18, 30; J 3:15f, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2f; Ac 13:46, 48; Ro 2:7; 5:21; 6:22f; Gal 6:8; 1 Ti 1:16; 6:12; Tit 1:2; 3:7; 1J 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20; Jd 21; D 10:3; 2 Cl 5:5; 8:4, 6; IEph 18:1; Hv 2, 3, 2; 3, 8, 4 al. Also βασιλεία αἰ. 2 Pt 1:11 (ApcPt Rainer 9; cp. Da 4:3; 7:27; Philo, Somn. 2, 285; Mel., P. 68, 493; OGI 569, 24 ὑπὲρ τῆς αἰωνίου καὶ ἀφθάρτου βασιλείας ὑμῶν; Dssm. B 279f, BS 363). Of the glory in the next life δόξα αἰ. 2 Ti 2:10; 1 Pt 5:10 (cp. Wsd 10:14; Jos., Ant. 15, 376.—SibOr 8, 410 φῶς αἰῶνιον). αἰώνιον βάρος δόξης 2 Cor 4:17; σωτηρία αἰ. (Is 45:17; Ps.-Clem., Hom. 1, 19) Hb 5:9; short ending of Mk. Of unseen glory in contrast to the transitory world of the senses τὰ μὴ βλεπόμενα αἰώνια 2 Cor 4:18.—χαρά IPhld ins; δοξάζεσθαι αἰωνίῳ ἔργῳ be glorified by an everlasting deed IPol 8:1. DHill, Gk. Words and Hebr. Mngs. ’67, 186–201; JvanderWatt, NovT 31, ’89, 217–28 (J).—DELG s.v. αἰών. M-M. TW. Sv.
[1] Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., pp. 33–34). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.​

 

[cwo]

<cwo>Need I discredit the lexicon or be an expert in linguistics to derive a logical conclusion that an adjective relates to its noun counterpart in scope? Some things aeonial are without end, because they are declared so independently, because aeonial does not imply without end, such as the example of aeonial hills, where hills are not eternal, they are aeonial, yet the aeonial life received by the elect is without end, because in a separate passage we read that these never die again, so it is both aeonial life and life without end (two different things). All angels have aeonial life, but those who sinned will eventually die like men, ending their aeonial life.<end>
There is a lexical fallacy known as Root fallacy: assigning the (supposed) original meaning of a word to its usages throughout history. I must ask this question again, how many semesters or credit hours of Greek do you have?
.....Do you honestly think you know something about Greek that the scholars who compiled the BDAG do not know? They bring to the table about 120-200 years of scholarship? If there was such a rule as you have stated do you think those scholars did not know about it or deliberately ignored it?
.....It is believed that Plato coined the adjective "aionios" because it first occurs in his writings. 20 bce-40 ce,

In “aion” Philo declares then, “nothing is past nor future but only present.” …”In aion there is no change”​

https://books.google.com/books?id=5ZlRPQJ8Qd4C&pg=PA297&lpg=PA297&dq=philo+aionios&source=bl&ots=5Fp4kwXOVH&sig=MntkCUA0qnOq_fVUJA9uqDGYb28&hl=en&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=0ahUKEwjE-ZmrtbPcAhXMEbwKHYETD-kQ6AEISTAD#v=onepage&q=philo aionios&f=false
.....Here is the definition of aionios from BAGD again. Please observe the many sources they used to determine the meaning are highlighted in blue. When you can bring that level of scholarship to the discussion then your opinion might have merit.

αἰώνιος (ία ③ pert. to a period of unending duration, without end (Diod S 1, 1, 5; 5, 73, 1; 15, 66, 1 δόξα αἰ. everlasting fame; in Diod S 1, 93, 1 the Egyptian dead are said to have passed to their αἰ. οἴκησις; Arrian, Peripl. 1, 4 ἐς μνήμην αἰ.; Jos., Bell. 4, 461 αἰ. χάρις=a benefaction for all future time; OGI 383, 10 [I b.c.] εἰς χρόνον αἰ.; EOwen, οἶκος αἰ.: JTS 38, ’37, 248–50; EStommel, Domus Aeterna: RAC IV 109–28) of the next life σκηναὶ αἰ. Lk 16:9 (cp. En 39:5). οἰκία, contrasted w. the οἰκία ἐπίγειος, of the glorified body 2 Cor 5:1. διαθήκη (Gen 9:16; 17:7; Lev 24:8; 2 Km 23:5 al.; PsSol 10:4 al.) Hb 13:20. εὐαγγέλιον Rv 14:6; κράτος in a doxolog. formula (=εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας) 1 Ti 6:16. παράκλησις 2 Th 2:16. λύτρωσις Hb 9:12. κληρονομία (Esth 4:17m) vs. 15; AcPl Ha 8, 21. αἰ. ἀπέχειν τινά (opp. πρὸς ὥραν) keep someone forever Phlm 15 (cp. Job 40:28). Very often of God’s judgment (Diod S 4, 63, 4 διὰ τὴν ἀσέβειαν ἐν ᾅδου διατελεῖν τιμωρίας αἰωνίου τυγχάνοντα; similarly 4, 69, 5; Jer 23:40; Da 12:2; Ps 76:6; 4 Macc 9:9; 13:15) κόλασις αἰ. (TestReub 5:5) Mt 25:46; 2 Cl 6:7; κρίμα αἰ. Hb 6:2 (cp. κρίσις αἰ. En 104:5). θάνατος B 20:1. ὄλεθρον (4 Macc 10:15) 2 Th 1:9. πῦρ (4 Macc 12:12; GrBar 4:16.—SibOr 8, 401 φῶς αἰ.) Mt 18:8; 25:41; Jd 7; Dg 10:7 (cp. 1QS 2:8). ἁμάρτημα Mk 3:29 (v.l. κρίσεως, κολάσεω, and ἁμαρτίας). On the other hand, of eternal life (Maximus Tyr. 6, 1d θεοῦ ζωὴ αἰ.; Diod S 8, 15, 3 life μετὰ τὸν θάνατον lasts εἰς ἅπαντα αἰῶνα; Da 12:2; 4 Macc 15:3;PsSol PsSol 3:12; OdeSol 11:16c; JosAs 8:11 cod. A [p. 50, 2 Bat.]; Philo, Fuga 78; Jos., Bell. 1, 650; SibOr 2, 336) in the Reign of God: ζωὴ αἰ. (Orig., C. Cels. 2, 77, 3) Mt 19:16, 29; 25:46; Mk 10:17, 30; Lk 10:25; 18:18, 30; J 3:15f, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2f; Ac 13:46, 48; Ro 2:7; 5:21; 6:22f; Gal 6:8; 1 Ti 1:16; 6:12; Tit 1:2; 3:7; 1J 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20; Jd 21; D 10:3; 2 Cl 5:5; 8:4, 6; IEph 18:1; Hv 2, 3, 2; 3, 8, 4 al. Also βασιλεία αἰ. 2 Pt 1:11 (ApcPt Rainer 9; cp. Da 4:3; 7:27; Philo, Somn. 2, 285; Mel., P. 68, 493; OGI 569, 24 ὑπὲρ τῆς αἰωνίου καὶ ἀφθάρτου βασιλείας ὑμῶν; Dssm. B 279f, BS 363). Of the glory in the next life δόξα αἰ. 2 Ti 2:10; 1 Pt 5:10 (cp. Wsd 10:14; Jos., Ant. 15, 376.—SibOr 8, 410 φῶς αἰῶνιον). αἰώνιον βάρος δόξης 2 Cor 4:17; σωτηρία αἰ. (Is 45:17; Ps.-Clem., Hom. 1, 19) Hb 5:9; short ending of Mk. Of unseen glory in contrast to the transitory world of the senses τὰ μὴ βλεπόμενα αἰώνια 2 Cor 4:18.—χαρά IPhld ins; δοξάζεσθαι αἰωνίῳ ἔργῳ be glorified by an everlasting deed IPol 8:1. DHill, Gk. Words and Hebr. Mngs. ’67, 186–201; JvanderWatt, NovT 31, ’89, 217–28 (J).—DELG s.v. αἰών. M-M. TW. Sv.
[1] Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., pp. 33–34). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.​

You're missing the point. Let me ask you this. If I told you to go to the bus stop to catch the "hourly bus", would you think that the bus.......

1. Comes to the stop every hour?
OR
2. Comes to the stop once a day?