U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-24-2011, 08:45 PM
 
30 posts, read 29,275 times
Reputation: 22

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironmaw1776 View Post
Yes, he is saying that the Greek word "aionios" which is translated in most English versions of the bible as "eternal" or "everlasting" does not actually mean either "eternal" or "everlasting".

Many contemporary theologians in trying to prove that the Greek word "aionios" means "eternal" and "everlasting" have made reference to the writings of Plato in order to do so, especially his work known as "Timaeus" ...

He is showing that in fact Plato's use of the word "aionios" cannot mean eternal due to the context in which Plato used it.
Yeah, but the context of Timaeus is that kronos is the "moving image" of aionios. What does that mean, do you think?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-24-2011, 09:50 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,302 posts, read 5,286,196 times
Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironmaw1776 View Post
Quote me one scripture that says "never ending time" please?
I did....what does a unto world without end mean to you, and what context is it therein?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2011, 12:21 AM
 
7,374 posts, read 7,198,849 times
Reputation: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
I did....what does a unto world without end mean to you, and what context is it therein?
I believe it is a mistranslation, as the literal Greek translation of the phrase "throughout all ages, world without end is "eis pasas tas genea tou aiOnos tOn aiOnOn", or properly translated should be "unto all generations of the age of ages" ...

In light of how the Hebrews used similar expressions, such as "king of kings", or "lord of lords", or "holy of holies", i understand "aiOnos tOn aiOnOn" to have a similar meaning, that being the crowning or greatest age of all the ages.

World without end to me is a reference to the final age in which God subjects all things to Christ after which he becomes all in all at the end of the ages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2011, 12:28 AM
 
7,374 posts, read 7,198,849 times
Reputation: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by samuel cripps View Post
Yeah, but the context of Timaeus is that kronos is the "moving image" of aionios. What does that mean, do you think?
Well, Plato's use of the word is somewhat different than the use of the same word in the classics, such as the works of Homer, and different than any of the usages which Aristotle employs it for, because he uses it to refer to the "eternal gods"(aidios theon).

In the classics, "aion" refers to the "life time" of a an individual.

It is certainly a unique use of the term, and certainly does not necessarily reflect the general understanding of the meaning of the term in the writings of the new testament or the old testament where the Septuagint is concerned.

Notice that Plato does not use the term to describe the Gods like he uses the word "aidios", but only in reference to the creation in relation to the Gods.

It seems to me that Plato uses the adjective "aionios" in reference to the complete temporal reality of the creation in totality without reference to past present or future.

That is to say, it seems to me that his use of the term is in relation to the life time of the gods, which is itself an "aidios aion", or an "eternal life time". And the father sought to capture the "aidios aion" or "eternal life time" of the "aidios theon" or "eternal Gods" in the image of creation, but that it was impossible to bestow this attribute on creation.

So i understand plato's use of the word "aionios" as a reference to being "of the life time", or "in the image of the life time" of the eternal(aidios) Gods.

Aionios does not itself mean eternal, but Plato's use of "aionios" in Timaeus is in reference(or pertaining) to the "aion" or "life time" of the eternal Gods.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2011, 10:43 AM
 
30 posts, read 29,275 times
Reputation: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironmaw1776 View Post
Well, Plato's use of the word is somewhat different than the use of the same word in the classics, such as the works of Homer, and different than any of the usages which Aristotle employs it for, because he uses it to refer to the "eternal gods"(aidios theon).

In the classics, "aion" refers to the "life time" of a an individual.

It is certainly a unique use of the term, and certainly does not necessarily reflect the general understanding of the meaning of the term in the writings of the new testament or the old testament where the Septuagint is concerned.

Notice that Plato does not use the term to describe the Gods like he uses the word "aidios", but only in reference to the creation in relation to the Gods.

It seems to me that Plato uses the adjective "aionios" in reference to the complete temporal reality of the creation in totality without reference to past present or future.

That is to say, it seems to me that his use of the term is in relation to the life time of the gods, which is itself an "aidios aion", or an "eternal life time". And the father sought to capture the "aidios aion" or "eternal life time" of the "aidios theon" or "eternal Gods" in the image of creation, but that it was impossible to bestow this attribute on creation.

So i understand plato's use of the word "aionios" as a reference to being "of the life time", or "in the image of the life time" of the eternal(aidios) Gods.

Aionios does not itself mean eternal, but Plato's use of "aionios" in Timaeus is in reference(or pertaining) to the "aion" or "life time" of the eternal Gods.

Ironmaw,

According to the text, aionios is used of the unchanging, timeless realm of the gods:

"Now the nature of the ideal being was everlasting (aiwnos/eon), but to bestow this attribute in its fulness upon a creature was impossible. Wherefore he resolved to have a moving image of eternity (aiwnos/eon), and when he set in order the heaven, he made this image eternal (aiwnion/eonian) but moving according to number, while eternity (aiwnion/eonian) itself rests in unity; and this image we call time."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2011, 10:50 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,302 posts, read 5,286,196 times
Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironmaw1776 View Post
I believe it is a mistranslation, as the literal Greek translation of the phrase "throughout all ages, world without end is "eis pasas tas genea tou aiOnos tOn aiOnOn", or properly translated should be "unto all generations of the age of ages" ...

In light of how the Hebrews used similar expressions, such as "king of kings", or "lord of lords", or "holy of holies", i understand "aiOnos tOn aiOnOn" to have a similar meaning, that being the crowning or greatest age of all the ages.

World without end to me is a reference to the final age in which God subjects all things to Christ after which he becomes all in all at the end of the ages.
What verse are you referring to?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2011, 11:05 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,430,337 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironmaw1776 View Post
Well, Plato's use of the word is somewhat different than the use of the same word in the classics, such as the works of Homer, and different than any of the usages which Aristotle employs it for, because he uses it to refer to the "eternal gods"(aidios theon).

In the classics, "aion" refers to the "life time" of a an individual.

It is certainly a unique use of the term, and certainly does not necessarily reflect the general understanding of the meaning of the term in the writings of the new testament or the old testament where the Septuagint is concerned.

Notice that Plato does not use the term to describe the Gods like he uses the word "aidios", but only in reference to the creation in relation to the Gods.

It seems to me that Plato uses the adjective "aionios" in reference to the complete temporal reality of the creation in totality without reference to past present or future.

That is to say, it seems to me that his use of the term is in relation to the life time of the gods, which is itself an "aidios aion", or an "eternal life time". And the father sought to capture the "aidios aion" or "eternal life time" of the "aidios theon" or "eternal Gods" in the image of creation, but that it was impossible to bestow this attribute on creation.

So i understand plato's use of the word "aionios" as a reference to being "of the life time", or "in the image of the life time" of the eternal(aidios) Gods.

Aionios does not itself mean eternal, but Plato's use of "aionios" in Timaeus is in reference(or pertaining) to the "aion" or "life time" of the eternal Gods.
Ironmaw, you are really close. I agree with most of what you say.

However, Plato's point was that there is "is" "was" and "will be." And that God is "is" for He is unchanging whereas aionios is "was" and "will be." So he was actually proving that it is improper to apply aionios to God since He "is." In other words, the aion and aionios are not "is" or eternal".

The point I disagree with Plato however is that Paul, in the New Testament, does say "the eonian God" in Romans 16:26 but it is used in the sense of His pertaining to the eons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2011, 11:12 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,430,337 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by samuel cripps View Post
Ironmaw,

According to the text, aionios is used of the unchanging, timeless realm of the gods:

"Now the nature of the ideal being was everlasting (aiwnos/eon), but to bestow this attribute in its fulness upon a creature was impossible. Wherefore he resolved to have a moving image of eternity (aiwnos/eon), and when he set in order the heaven, he made this image eternal (aiwnion/eonian) but moving according to number, while eternity (aiwnion/eonian) itself rests in unity; and this image we call time."
Concerning Plato's Timaeus:
"WHEN the father creator saw the creature which he had made moving and living, the created image of the AIDION [imperceptible] gods, he rejoiced, and in his joy determined to make the copy still more like the original; and as this was AIDION [imperceptible], he sought to make the universe EONION, so far as might be. Now the nature of the ideal being was EONIAN, but to bestow this attribute in its fulness upon a creature was impossible. Wherefore he resolved to have a moving image of the EON, and when he set in order the heaven, he made this image the EON but moving according to number, while EONIAN itself rests in unity; and this image we call time. For there were no days and nights and months and years before the heaven was created, but when he constructed the heaven he created them also. They are all parts of time, and the past and future are created species of time, which we unconsciously but wrongly transfer to the AIDION [imperceptible] essence; for we say that He "was," He "is," He "will be," but the truth is that "is" alone is properly attributed to Him, and that "was" and "will be" only to be spoken of becoming in time, for they are motions, but that which is immovably the same cannot become older or younger by time, nor ever did or has become, or hereafter will be, older or younger, nor is subject at all to any of those states which affect moving and sensible things and of which generation is the cause. These are the forms of time, which imitates the EON and revolves according to a law of number. Moreover, when we say that what has become is become and what becomes is becoming, and that what will become is about to become and that the non-existent is non-existent-all these are inaccurate modes of expression."

Plato just proved he used aion and aionion for time and that it is improper to use aion and aionion of God since God IS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2011, 12:40 PM
 
7,374 posts, read 7,198,849 times
Reputation: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Concerning Plato's Timaeus:
"WHEN the father creator saw the creature which he had made moving and living, the created image of the AIDION [imperceptible] gods, he rejoiced, and in his joy determined to make the copy still more like the original; and as this was AIDION [imperceptible], he sought to make the universe EONION, so far as might be. Now the nature of the ideal being was EONIAN, but to bestow this attribute in its fulness upon a creature was impossible. Wherefore he resolved to have a moving image of the EON, and when he set in order the heaven, he made this image the EON but moving according to number, while EONIAN itself rests in unity; and this image we call time. For there were no days and nights and months and years before the heaven was created, but when he constructed the heaven he created them also. They are all parts of time, and the past and future are created species of time, which we unconsciously but wrongly transfer to the AIDION [imperceptible] essence; for we say that He "was," He "is," He "will be," but the truth is that "is" alone is properly attributed to Him, and that "was" and "will be" only to be spoken of becoming in time, for they are motions, but that which is immovably the same cannot become older or younger by time, nor ever did or has become, or hereafter will be, older or younger, nor is subject at all to any of those states which affect moving and sensible things and of which generation is the cause. These are the forms of time, which imitates the EON and revolves according to a law of number. Moreover, when we say that what has become is become and what becomes is becoming, and that what will become is about to become and that the non-existent is non-existent-all these are inaccurate modes of expression."

Plato just proved he used aion and aionion for time and that it is improper to use aion and aionion of God since God IS.

Well whatever Plato meant by the use of the word Aionios, it is doubtful that he used it to mean eternal, as this place in Timaeus was not the only time he used the word.

Quote:
Plato, referrring to certain souls in Hades, describes them as being in “aionian” intoxication. But that he does not use the word in the sense of endless is evident from the Phaedon, where he says, “It is a very ancient opinion that souls quitting the world, repair to the infernal reigions, and return after that, to live in this world.” After the “aionian” intoxication is over, they return to earth, which demonstrates that the word was not used by him as meaning endless.

From: Matthew 25:46 - “Aionian” or “Eternal”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-25-2011, 02:47 PM
 
30 posts, read 29,275 times
Reputation: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
Ironmaw, you are really close. I agree with most of what you say.

However, Plato's point was that there is "is" "was" and "will be." And that God is "is" for He is unchanging whereas aionios is "was" and "will be." So he was actually proving that it is improper to apply aionios to God since He "is".
Eusebius, Plato is actually using aionios in a manner opposite to the one you have mistakenly attributed to him. Timeaus 37d quite plainly uses aionios in reference to the invisible, uncreated realm of divinity:
Quote:
When the father creator saw the creature which he had made moving and living, the created image of the imperceptible (aidion) gods, he rejoiced, and in his joy determined to make the copy still more like the original; and as this was eonian, (aionios) he sought to make the universe so far as might be of a like kind.
As we continue reading the text, we understand that the original is aionios, which rests in unity ("is"), as opposed to the copy which moves according to number ("was" and "will be"). Consider:

"...he made this image eternal (aiwnion/eonian) but moving according to number, while eternity (aiwnion/eonian) itself rests in unity..."

The image (time/kronos) moves according to number (transience) whilst the eternal (aionios) rests in unity (is not subject to the passing of time).

This Platonic notion was later expressed by the neo-Platonist, Philo, when he wrote, "but in eternity (aion) nothing is passed, nothing is about to be, but it exists only." (De Mundo 7)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top