Home   Sign In   Join   Search   Forums
8/25/17 12:58 PM 

bigd9832
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (21,681)
Chicago, IL


AV Re 14:6 . And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,



The word 'aionios' shows up in the NT in 69 verses. Yet in at least 4 of them are not translated as "eternal," "forever," or "everlasting" by the bi-sexual king...

AV Ro 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,

AV 2Ti 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called [us] with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

AV Ti 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

AV 2Pt 1:11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.


Can you find the word it was translated into within these verses?

Also, Peter tells us that the Millennial Kingdom will last forever, whereas John says it will last for 1000 years.

AV 2Pt 1:11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Do you really think their teachings differed so much?

And so, it was the King of England from before 1611 that determined the word 'aiõnios' would mean "eternal," "forever," or "everlasting." The translator of the time would report to the king, and if there was any controversy over a word it would be unilaterally solved by the words, "Yes, your majesty."

How accurate could that have been?

'Aiõnios' is the adjective form of the word 'aiõn.'

The Keyword Concordance tells us...

eon - the longest segment of time known in the Scriptures. Seven distinct divisions are indicated, pre-eonian times (2Tim. 1:9), five eons, two of which are future (called the eons of the eons -Rev. 1:6), and the time after the conclusion of the eons (Heb. 9:26). "Age" is not a suitable use, being generally applied to an administration. The eons synchronize with the worlds (Eph. 2:2), the eons dealing with the time aspect and the worlds with the cosmic aspect or constitution. Also used for the remainder of an eon.

In other literature of that time, the word 'eon' is used to mean "a lifetime"...

In our consideration of lexicography, we should note that the primary usage of aiõn, both in early and later Greek, is that of the duration of one’s life. “The oldest lexicographer, Hesychius (c. 400-600 A.D.), defines aiõn thus: ‘The life of man, the time of life.’ At this early date, no theologian had yet imported into the word the meaning of endless duration. It retained only the sense it had in the Classics, and in the Bible . . . . John of Damascus (c. 750 A.D.) says, ‘The life of every man is called [his] aiõn . . . . The whole duration or life of this world is called aiõn . . . . The life after the resurrection is called the aiõn to come’ . . . .

“But in the sixteenth century, Phavorinus was compelled to notice an addition, which subsequently to the time of the famous Council of 544 had been grafted onto the word. He says: ‘Aiõn, time, also [by association] life, also habit, or way of life. Aiõn is also the eternal and the endless as it seems to the theologian.’ Theologians had succeeded in using the word in the sense of endless, and Phavorinus was forced to recognize their usage of it. His phraseology shows conclusively enough that he attributed to theologians the authorship of that use of the word.

by James Coram
http://concordant.org/expositions/the-eons/eon-indefinite-duration-part-one/

We are told that all lexicons do not agree. Which means some of them must be wrong.


Meet singles at DateHookup.com, we're 100% free! Join now!


8/25/17 12:58 PM 

bigd9832
Over 10,000 Posts!!! (21,681)
Chicago, IL


cont.

Forever and ever:

The Ancient Greek term 'aiõn' is a translation of the Ancient Hebrew term 'olam.'

“The crowning proof that the idea of endlessness is foreign to olam is afforded by the phrase ‘for ever and ever.’ The English reader may suppose the second ‘ever’ to be the same word as the first. But it is not. The Hebrew is va-ed. As the Septuagint translates it, ‘and still,’ and as the translators have so rendered it in scores of places, we will translate it ‘beyond’ or ‘further.’ Now, if olam meant endlessness as some say it does, why reinforce it by adding ‘beyond’? Nor is this all. Further study discloses that even olam va-ed (‘for ever and ever’) does not refer to infinitude. The Psalmist says: ‘I will keep Your law continually, forever’ [i.e., ‘for the eon and beyond’; CV, Psa.119:44]. Now, as our Lord plainly indicates the passing away of the law (Matt.5:17,18), it follows that law observance is over once the law is done away.

The Hebrew 'olam va-ed,' and its Greek equivalent “for the eons of the eons,” then, convey the idea of terminable, though chronologically indefinite and unrevealed duration.

ibid

So the phrase translated in the KJV as "forever and ever" really means "for the eon and further."

Of course, the acid test of any translation is how much sense it makes when used. I have already offered one example of how 2Peter 1:11 cannot mean both "eternal" and 1000 years, or an eon.

“Yahweh, He shall reign for the eon and further” (Ex.15:18). The reign of Yahweh, in the Person of Christ, will continue not “for ever,” but until the consummation, when He gives up the kingdom to His God and Father (1 Cor.15:24). Similarly, the mercy of Yahweh is “for the eon and further” (Psa.52:8).

AV Ex 15:18 The LORD shall reign for ever and ever.

Will He reign "forever" or for the duration of the Millennium (1000 years)? Can we afford to ignore 1Corinthians 15:24?

CLV 1C 15:24 thereafter the consummation, whenever He may be giving up the kingdom to His God and Father, whenever He should be nullifying all sovereignty and all authority and power.

CLV 1C 15:28 Now, whenever all may be subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also shall be subjected to Him Who subjects all to Him, that God may be All in all.


Our Lord deemed it sufficient contrast to compare temporary (i.e., a part of a season) with a single season–less than a year (Matt.13:21). Yet here, in 2 Corinthians 4:18, while the contrast is far greater, it does not follow that it is therefore infinite. The contrast is between our afflictions, which last, so to say, but for a brief “partial season,” and our promised, long-enduring “eonian” glory which lasts throughout the oncoming eons, until the consummation, when God is All in all.

CLV 2C 4:18 at our not noting what is being observed, but what is not being observed, for what is being observed is temporary, yet what is not being observed is eonian.

Just as surely as the abolition of slavery entails freedom for those formerly enslaved, the abolition of death entails life for those formerly dead.

Indeed, no sane and unprejudiced mind will claim otherwise. A sane and unprejudiced mind, however, is the gift of God. All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are concealed in Him (Col.2:3). We cannot enlighten others, though God may enlighten others through us. If most cannot accept our testimony, we can only assure ourselves that we are simply believing what the Scriptures actually say.

ibid

Sane being a keyword in that sentence. Those who insist that the word 'aiõn' means "forever" instead of looking at the evidence and coming to the only conclusion, the word insanity comes to mind as a description. No doubt it is the same people who promote the word "hell," giving way to their own perversions and fantasies. Perhaps these are the same people who can't wait to see other being tortured and burned in the "eternal" fires of a "hell."

How sick is that?

If a translator should persist in presenting us with his own opinions about God’s Word instead of God’s own Word itself, and if, more seriously still, he should represent to us what is merely the former as if it were the latter, we must reject his renderings, deeming them to be at least incompetent and erroneous translations.
ibid