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 01-06-2010, 05:45 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,295 posts, read 5,009,850 times
Reputation: 420

Advertisements

Eusebius,

Keep studying:

Howbeit that [was] not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

For we that are in [this] tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-06-2010, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,295 posts, read 5,009,850 times
Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironmaw1776 View Post
What makes you think that the word aion(age) is in its singular form in that verse?

The singular form of aion is "aiwni" as found in Mathew 12:42 ... here it is the plural form "aiwsin" ...
You're wrong. Keep studying.

aion - singular with no preposition is translated "age", some times "world" in the KJV, and means a finite time with only one exception:

"eis aion" - where "aion" is singular and preceded by the preposition "eis" is an unending period of time and is translated "for ever" in English.

Instead of translating the Greek "for ages unto ages" literally, in English the translators have merely said "for ever", which does not have the force of the Greek! It may be very surprising to you that the book of Revelation always uses the emphatic form "for ever and for ever" and never "for ever" whereas the gospels use both forms, but mostly "for ever".

eis aions aions" TWO "aion" is preceded with the preposition "eis", where both "aion" are plural, the first being accusative or object case, the latter being the genitive case, and is literally translated "for ages unto ages" and is the superlative and exaggerated form, always means unending period of time due to the word used TWICE, both times as plurals, not justone "aion" as a singular noun as in Ephesians 2:7

We are in the AGE to come...forever.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2010, 05:57 PM
 
7,374 posts, read 6,804,514 times
Reputation: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
You're wrong. Keep studying.

aion - singular with no preposition is translated "age", some times "world" in the KJV, and means a finite time with only one exception:

"eis aion" - where "aion" is singular and preceded by the preposition "eis" is an unending period of time and is translated "for ever" in English.

Instead of translating the Greek "for ages unto ages" literally, in English the translators have merely said "for ever", which does not have the force of the Greek! It may be very surprising to you that the book of Revelation always uses the emphatic form "for ever and for ever" and never "for ever" whereas the gospels use both forms, but mostly "for ever".

eis aions aions" TWO "aion" is preceded with the preposition "eis", where both "aion" are plural, the first being accusative or object case, the latter being the genitive case, and is literally translated "for ages unto ages" and is the superlative and exaggerated form, always means unending period of time due to the word used TWICE, both times as plurals, not justone "aion" as a singular noun as in Ephesians 2:7

We are in the AGE to come...forever.
Sciotamicks, i love you bro, but you are in denial of the facts. The word aion in that verse is plural, and any linguist would tell you that. I have shown you the Greek and you still deny the fact. Just because you deny reality, it doesn't make it any less real.
Quote:
Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus
ina endeixhtai en toiV aiwsin toiV epercomenoiV ton uperballonta plouton thV caritoV autou en crhstothti ef hmaV en cristw ihsou
Scrivener 1894 Textus Receptus
ina endeixhtai en toiV aiwsin toiV epercomenoiV ton uperballonta plouton thV caritoV autou en crhstothti ef hmaV en cristw ihsou

Byzantine Majority
ina endeixhtai en toiV aiwsin toiV epercomenoiV ton uperballonta plouton thV caritoV autou en crhstothti ef hmaV en cristw ihsou


Alexandrian
ina endeixhtai en toiV aiwsin toiV epercomenoiV to uperballon ploutos thV caritoV autou en crhstothti ef hmaV en cristw ihsou


Hort and Westcott
ina endeixhtai en toiV aiwsin toiV epercomenoiV to uperballon ploutoV thV caritoV autou en crhstothti ef hmaV en cristw ihsou

Latin Vulgate
2:7 ut ostenderet in saeculis supervenientibus abundantes divitias gratiae suae in bonitate super nos in Christo Iesu


King James Version
2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in [his] kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

American Standard Version
2:7 that in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus:

Bible in Basic English
2:7 That in the time to come he might make clear the full wealth of his grace in his mercy to us in Christ Jesus:


Darby's English Translation
2:7 that he might display in the coming ages the surpassing riches of his grace in kindness towards us in Christ Jesus.


Douay Rheims
2:7 That he might shew in the ages to come the abundant riches of his grace, in his bounty towards us in Christ Jesus.


Noah Webster Bible
2:7 That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness towards us, through Christ Jesus.


Weymouth New Testament
2:7 in order that, by His goodness to us in Christ Jesus, He might display in the Ages to come the transcendent riches of His grace.

World English Bible
2:7 that in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus;

Young's Literal Translation
2:7 that He might show, in the ages that are coming, the exceeding riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus,
In everyone of these texts the word aion/age is in plural form, i cant believe you would even try to argue against this FACT.

Your post above has nothing to do with the verse in question. You are clouding the issue with Jargon, something you were blaming me for earlier. Sometimes i think your trying to confuse people, but im not a simple minded person without an education in these things. You are not confusing me, except in regard whether or not you actually believe what you say or are simply laying a smokescreen for something else.

Last edited by Ironmaw1776; 01-06-2010 at 06:28 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2010, 06:09 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,295 posts, read 5,009,850 times
Reputation: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironmaw1776 View Post
What does 2 Peter 3:10 mean to me?


2Pe 3:9-10
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.


A day with God is as a thousand years. So the day of the lord is the millennial reign that begins with the tribulation and ends at the end of the millennial reign when God destroys the heavens and the earth by fire ... Then he creates the new heavens and earth.
You are in denial of the facts Ironmaw:


stoicheion - Elements, rudiments, principles

Of the few times this word is used in the New Testament, it is always in reference to the Old Covenant:

Gal 4:3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:

Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Col 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

Heb 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which [be] the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

2 Pet 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

2 Pet 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat.

This was clearly in reference to the Old system of Covenant Israel, and that did burn up with fervent heat in 70 AD, thus fulfilling the prophecies, and ushering in the New Covenantal Order and System under Christ.

Death and Hades were swallowed up.
Deal with it. Your exegesis is wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironmaw1776 View Post
Sciotamicks, i love you bro, but you are in denial of the facts. The word aion in that verse is plural, and any linguist would tell you that. I have shown you the Greek and you still deny the fact. Just because you deny reality, it doesn't make it any less real.
In everyone of these texts the word aion/age is in plural form, i cant believe you would even try to argue against this FACT.
We aren't examining the translation to English or Latin, Ironmaw, but the original language. So please, if you want to go there, try, but from what I am seeing here, is you cannot. Either debate the ancient language with me as I have presented, or retract form the argument altogether

You haven't proven anything except for your inability to analyze the Greek..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2010, 06:10 PM
 
7,374 posts, read 6,804,514 times
Reputation: 888
Sciotamicks, can you refer to a single translation, or a single professor or a single theologian or a single apologist or a single linguist or anyone beside yourself who believes and states that aion in this verse is singular?

Last edited by Ironmaw1776; 01-06-2010 at 06:27 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2010, 06:21 PM
 
7,374 posts, read 6,804,514 times
Reputation: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
You are in denial of the facts Ironmaw:


stoicheion - Elements, rudiments, principles

Of the few times this word is used in the New Testament, it is always in reference to the Old Covenant:

Gal 4:3 Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:

Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Col 2:20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

Heb 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which [be] the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

2 Pet 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

2 Pet 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat.

This was clearly in reference to the Old system of Covenant Israel, and that did burn up with fervent heat in 70 AD, thus fulfilling the prophecies, and ushering in the New Covenantal Order and System under Christ.

Death and Hades were swallowed up.
Deal with it. Your exegesis is wrong.
According to your interpretation every time the word stoicheion is used it is referring to the law, not according to mine or many other scholars and theologians on earth today and throughout the past 2000 years. Yes, i know that is an "argumentum ad verecundiam", and i admit maybe these scholars and theologians are wrong and you are right, but i don't thinks so, at least not in this instance.

Can you even admit that you might be wrong? I'll admit i might be wrong, though i don't believe i am ...

Quote:
We aren't examining the translation to English or Latin, Ironmaw, but the original language. So please, if you want to go there, try, but from what I am seeing here, is you cannot. Either debate the ancient language with me as I have presented, or retract form the argument altogether

You haven't proven anything except for your inability to analyze the Greek..
Every single translation of the scriptures is evidence of what i am saying, not to mention the fact that the original Greek obviously has aion in its plural form, as i have demonstrated.

You haven't provided a single shred of evidence to back up your claims in this regard. Your a certainly stubborn and willing to deny everything in order to uphold your position.

"Aiwsin" is the plural form of "aiwni", thats a fact jack.

Last edited by Ironmaw1776; 01-06-2010 at 07:01 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-06-2010, 08:25 PM
 
Location: Seattle, Wa
5,295 posts, read 5,009,850 times
Reputation: 420
Ironmaw,

Let interpret this further to help you, and other futurists understand this term you so vehemently interpret to be referencing to multiple ages to come muddled with Universalist beliefs:

That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus

"In the ages to come": (en + aion + eperchomai). "In the approaching ages". This is a reference to the future, beginning then when it was written and extending into eternity, perpetually.

It is a constant age, never-ending and from the beginning...one age.

That He might show forth (middle reflexive voice; for His own glory, Ephesians 1:6 Ephesians 1:12 Ephesians 1:14 ) in the world which is coming on," that is, the blessed age and world of the Gospel which supersede "the age (Greek, for 'course') of this world" ( Ephesians 2:2 ), and the past "ages" from which the mystery was hidden ( Colossians 1:26 Colossians 1:27 ).

These good ages, though beginning with the first preaching of the Gospel, and thenceforth continually succeeding one another as one, consummated in the Lord's coming again in AD 70 to judge the present world/age (compare Ephesians 1:21 , Hebrews 6:5 ). The words, "coming on," do not exclude the time then present, but imply simply the perpetual age following upon Christ's "raising them up together" spiritually in the resurrection of the dead and living, the Parousia, the marraige, the realization and justification that transpired on the cross itself (Ephesians 2:6)

It is my contention that the age to come was a technical term for the final state of affairs, that its usage was so fixed that, even when Jewish groups began explicitly speaking of another period of time to precede that final state, calling it the messianic period, or age, ages, era, or days, or world, the term "ages to come" still did not refer to that sub-final time, or multiple times, but rather referred to the final, eternal, last state of creation in Christ in the New Heavens and New Earth, that which was justified in 70 AD.

You may find the examples you have provided less than persuasive regarding this argument, but even without them I would have called Ephesians 2.7 a hyperbole. It just means forever. Simple as that.

One age, forever, perpetually unending.

The terms 'age to come' 'ages of the ages' 'ages to come' are technical terms, stuffed with specific meaning for the NT writers, they are not simple 'time texts', but are almost qualitative in content, rather than quantitative. 'ages of the ages' is usually translated as 'forever' for instance, equating to hebrew olam. 'ages to come' would be a hyperbolic statement expressive of the fulness of that which is to come in comparison with that which we have now, which is complete and eternal.

Normally the “ages to come” are invoked by the prophets to underscore God’s unending blessings for his people (Isa. 45:17; Dan. 7:18).
This theme is later taken up by Paul in Ephesians 2:7.

Christ is the culimination of the prior ages, both chronologically and teleologically. Your view is making no distinction between the Old Testament epoch and the New Testament epoch but merely making the New Testament epoch the tail end of the Old and such ignores the radical change that did in fact happen at the close of the Mosaic Age. We have two books, the OT and NT, but we must remember that the NT, was written during the Mosaic Age, the OT epoch, and only until the the passing away and elimination of that system, did we embark on what was already consummated in the cross, which occurred at 70 AD.

The issue here Ironmaw, is that you have been clouded with these ideas based on imposing alternate languages into the text, disregarding the culture, language, and syntax of the writers of the NT, and ancient Greek.

αιωσιν noun - dative plural masculine

Do you understand what that means?

It is plural, but my point is that it does not represent multiple ages, but rather one, eternal age, perpetually constant, without end.
That is why it is a dative case. It represents one singular period, not multiple periods as you suggest, without any exegetical analysis whatsoever. The noun itself is represented as eternal, and is given the eternal function through the riches of Jesus Christ.

Or do you believe that those riches will cease for some odd reason?

Are we just going to go by your word, without a proper rendition of the Greek and a exhaustive biblical comparative?

No, absolutely not. That is how false doctrines are created. By ideas without spiritual discernment of the Word, interpreting itself.

The ages to come, or the times which were upon Paul, are already approaching nearness to this letter, as Paul compounded several times in many of his writings. This "ages" to come is one singular age, that age which we are living in now.

If we are not Ironmaw, then our salvation has not been justified.
This is what you are proposing, and I am refuting.


Quote:
According to your interpretation every time the word stoicheion is used it is referring to the law, not according to mine or many other scholars and theologians on earth today and throughout the past 2000 years. Yes, i know that is an "argumentum ad verecundiam", and i admit maybe these scholars and theologians are wrong and you are right, but i don't thinks so, at least not in this instance.
You are wrong. Read the context of each verse individually, and render what he apostles are talking about.

Quote:
Can you even admit that you might be wrong? I'll admit i might be wrong, though i don't believe i am ...
Can you?
I did when I was a Dispy...
I submitted to thousands of errors and went Full Preterist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 06:43 PM
 
7,374 posts, read 6,804,514 times
Reputation: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
Ironmaw,

Let interpret this further to help you, and other futurists understand this term you so vehemently interpret to be referencing to multiple ages to come muddled with Universalist beliefs:

That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus

"In the ages to come": (en + aion + eperchomai). "In the approaching ages". This is a reference to the future, beginning then when it was written and extending into eternity, perpetually.

It is a constant age, never-ending and from the beginning...one age.

That He might show forth (middle reflexive voice; for His own glory, Ephesians 1:6 Ephesians 1:12 Ephesians 1:14 ) in the world which is coming on," that is, the blessed age and world of the Gospel which supersede "the age (Greek, for 'course') of this world" ( Ephesians 2:2 ), and the past "ages" from which the mystery was hidden ( Colossians 1:26 Colossians 1:27 ).

These good ages, though beginning with the first preaching of the Gospel, and thenceforth continually succeeding one another as one, consummated in the Lord's coming again in AD 70 to judge the present world/age (compare Ephesians 1:21 , Hebrews 6:5 ). The words, "coming on," do not exclude the time then present, but imply simply the perpetual age following upon Christ's "raising them up together" spiritually in the resurrection of the dead and living, the Parousia, the marraige, the realization and justification that transpired on the cross itself (Ephesians 2:6)

It is my contention that the age to come was a technical term for the final state of affairs, that its usage was so fixed that, even when Jewish groups began explicitly speaking of another period of time to precede that final state, calling it the messianic period, or age, ages, era, or days, or world, the term "ages to come" still did not refer to that sub-final time, or multiple times, but rather referred to the final, eternal, last state of creation in Christ in the New Heavens and New Earth, that which was justified in 70 AD.

You may find the examples you have provided less than persuasive regarding this argument, but even without them I would have called Ephesians 2.7 a hyperbole. It just means forever. Simple as that.

One age, forever, perpetually unending.

The terms 'age to come' 'ages of the ages' 'ages to come' are technical terms, stuffed with specific meaning for the NT writers, they are not simple 'time texts', but are almost qualitative in content, rather than quantitative. 'ages of the ages' is usually translated as 'forever' for instance, equating to hebrew olam. 'ages to come' would be a hyperbolic statement expressive of the fulness of that which is to come in comparison with that which we have now, which is complete and eternal.

Normally the “ages to come” are invoked by the prophets to underscore God’s unending blessings for his people (Isa. 45:17; Dan. 7:18).
This theme is later taken up by Paul in Ephesians 2:7.

Christ is the culimination of the prior ages, both chronologically and teleologically. Your view is making no distinction between the Old Testament epoch and the New Testament epoch but merely making the New Testament epoch the tail end of the Old and such ignores the radical change that did in fact happen at the close of the Mosaic Age. We have two books, the OT and NT, but we must remember that the NT, was written during the Mosaic Age, the OT epoch, and only until the the passing away and elimination of that system, did we embark on what was already consummated in the cross, which occurred at 70 AD.

The issue here Ironmaw, is that you have been clouded with these ideas based on imposing alternate languages into the text, disregarding the culture, language, and syntax of the writers of the NT, and ancient Greek.

αιωσιν noun - dative plural masculine

Do you understand what that means?

It is plural, but my point is that it does not represent multiple ages, but rather one, eternal age, perpetually constant, without end.
That is why it is a dative case. It represents one singular period, not multiple periods as you suggest, without any exegetical analysis whatsoever. The noun itself is represented as eternal, and is given the eternal function through the riches of Jesus Christ.

Or do you believe that those riches will cease for some odd reason?

Are we just going to go by your word, without a proper rendition of the Greek and a exhaustive biblical comparative?

No, absolutely not. That is how false doctrines are created. By ideas without spiritual discernment of the Word, interpreting itself.

The ages to come, or the times which were upon Paul, are already approaching nearness to this letter, as Paul compounded several times in many of his writings. This "ages" to come is one singular age, that age which we are living in now.

If we are not Ironmaw, then our salvation has not been justified.
This is what you are proposing, and I am refuting.




You are wrong. Read the context of each verse individually, and render what he apostles are talking about.



Can you?
I did when I was a Dispy...
I submitted to thousands of errors and went Full Preterist.
If you ask me, this is just more evidence of how you twist scripture in order to make it say what you want it to ...

The only thing in the post above which you have written which argues the point you are making is this ...


Quote:
αιωσιν noun - dative plural masculine

Do you understand what that means?

It is plural, but my point is that it does not represent multiple ages, but rather one, eternal age, perpetually constant, without end.
That is why it is a dative case. It represents one singular period, not multiple periods as you suggest, without any exegetical analysis whatsoever. The noun itself is represented as eternal, and is given the eternal function through the riches of Jesus Christ.

Or do you believe that those riches will cease for some odd reason?
A dative noun does not change the fact that it is plural. The dative case in general indicate a noun to which something is given. It has nothing to do with the noun being plural or singular ...

You say a plural noun does not represent multiple things, this is completely illogical and grammatically erroneous ...

Quote:
Or do you believe that those riches will cease for some odd reason?
Your argument is that it represents a singular age because the riches of Gods glory are eternal. This is not exegesis, this is false logic. Just because the riches of Gods glory are eternal, that meaning they last forever, doesn't mean that it will take forever for him to reveal them to us. The riches of his glory are being revealed in these ages, and when these ages have ended, the riches of his glory will have been fully revealed.

Last edited by Ironmaw1776; 01-07-2010 at 06:53 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 06:48 PM
 
7,374 posts, read 6,804,514 times
Reputation: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks View Post
Ironmaw,

Let interpret this further to help you, and other futurists understand this term you so vehemently interpret to be referencing to multiple ages to come muddled with Universalist beliefs:

That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus

"In the ages to come": (en + aion + eperchomai). "In the approaching ages". This is a reference to the future, beginning then when it was written and extending into eternity, perpetually.

It is a constant age, never-ending and from the beginning...one age.

That He might show forth (middle reflexive voice; for His own glory, Ephesians 1:6 Ephesians 1:12 Ephesians 1:14 ) in the world which is coming on," that is, the blessed age and world of the Gospel which supersede "the age (Greek, for 'course') of this world" ( Ephesians 2:2 ), and the past "ages" from which the mystery was hidden ( Colossians 1:26 Colossians 1:27 ).

These good ages, though beginning with the first preaching of the Gospel, and thenceforth continually succeeding one another as one, consummated in the Lord's coming again in AD 70 to judge the present world/age (compare Ephesians 1:21 , Hebrews 6:5 ). The words, "coming on," do not exclude the time then present, but imply simply the perpetual age following upon Christ's "raising them up together" spiritually in the resurrection of the dead and living, the Parousia, the marraige, the realization and justification that transpired on the cross itself (Ephesians 2:6)

It is my contention that the age to come was a technical term for the final state of affairs, that its usage was so fixed that, even when Jewish groups began explicitly speaking of another period of time to precede that final state, calling it the messianic period, or age, ages, era, or days, or world, the term "ages to come" still did not refer to that sub-final time, or multiple times, but rather referred to the final, eternal, last state of creation in Christ in the New Heavens and New Earth, that which was justified in 70 AD.

You may find the examples you have provided less than persuasive regarding this argument, but even without them I would have called Ephesians 2.7 a hyperbole. It just means forever. Simple as that.

One age, forever, perpetually unending.

The terms 'age to come' 'ages of the ages' 'ages to come' are technical terms, stuffed with specific meaning for the NT writers, they are not simple 'time texts', but are almost qualitative in content, rather than quantitative. 'ages of the ages' is usually translated as 'forever' for instance, equating to hebrew olam. 'ages to come' would be a hyperbolic statement expressive of the fulness of that which is to come in comparison with that which we have now, which is complete and eternal.

Normally the “ages to come” are invoked by the prophets to underscore God’s unending blessings for his people (Isa. 45:17; Dan. 7:18).
This theme is later taken up by Paul in Ephesians 2:7.

Christ is the culimination of the prior ages, both chronologically and teleologically. Your view is making no distinction between the Old Testament epoch and the New Testament epoch but merely making the New Testament epoch the tail end of the Old and such ignores the radical change that did in fact happen at the close of the Mosaic Age. We have two books, the OT and NT, but we must remember that the NT, was written during the Mosaic Age, the OT epoch, and only until the the passing away and elimination of that system, did we embark on what was already consummated in the cross, which occurred at 70 AD.

The issue here Ironmaw, is that you have been clouded with these ideas based on imposing alternate languages into the text, disregarding the culture, language, and syntax of the writers of the NT, and ancient Greek.

αιωσιν noun - dative plural masculine

Do you understand what that means?

It is plural, but my point is that it does not represent multiple ages, but rather one, eternal age, perpetually constant, without end.
That is why it is a dative case. It represents one singular period, not multiple periods as you suggest, without any exegetical analysis whatsoever. The noun itself is represented as eternal, and is given the eternal function through the riches of Jesus Christ.

Or do you believe that those riches will cease for some odd reason?

Are we just going to go by your word, without a proper rendition of the Greek and a exhaustive biblical comparative?

No, absolutely not. That is how false doctrines are created. By ideas without spiritual discernment of the Word, interpreting itself.

The ages to come, or the times which were upon Paul, are already approaching nearness to this letter, as Paul compounded several times in many of his writings. This "ages" to come is one singular age, that age which we are living in now.

If we are not Ironmaw, then our salvation has not been justified.
This is what you are proposing, and I am refuting.




You are wrong. Read the context of each verse individually, and render what he apostles are talking about.



Can you?
I did when I was a Dispy...
I submitted to thousands of errors and went Full Preterist.
I admitted that i might be wrong, then I asked if you could admit that you might be wrong, to which you replied ...
Quote:

Can you?
I did when I was a Dispy...
I submitted to thousands of errors and went Full Preterist.
This is not an admission that you might be wrong, this is an admission that you were wrong at one time, or at least that you believe you were wrong at one time. That is not what i asked you ...

I asked you if you could admit that you might be wrong presently concerning preterism ... You did not admit that you might be wrong. I did admit and i do admit that i might be wrong. Because you have not admitted that you might be wrong after having been asked if you could, i am left to assume that you cannot or simply will not admit that you might be wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 08:42 PM
 
7,374 posts, read 6,804,514 times
Reputation: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironmaw1776 View Post
If you ask me, this is just more evidence of how you twist scripture in order to make it say what you want it to ...

The only thing in the post above which you have written which argues the point you are making is this ...


A dative noun does not change the fact that it is plural. The dative case in general indicate a noun to which something is given. It has nothing to do with the noun being plural or singular ...

You say a plural noun does not represent multiple things, this is completely illogical and grammatically erroneous ...

Your argument is that it represents a singular age because the riches of Gods glory are eternal. This is not exegesis, this is false logic. Just because the riches of Gods glory are eternal, that meaning they last forever, doesn't mean that it will take forever for him to reveal them to us. The riches of his glory are being revealed in these ages, and when these ages have ended, the riches of his glory will have been fully revealed.

I meant to say ...

"The dative case does not change the fact that it is plural. The dative case in general indicates a noun to which something is given. It has nothing to do with the noun being plural or singular" ...
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

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, 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 - Top