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.
AION is used in 1 Peter 1:23, which by UR translation..means age, in which I agree depending on the context of its use, which is the root of AIONIOS. I included AION, because of its discrepancy between UR and fundamental doctrine of the faith. Since UR porposes that AIONIOS does not determine forever, and for this reason it terms this, is due to its relationship with AION, then both must be included in this study.
I love how you change your beginning page of this thread AFTER I posted on AIONIOS. Your original thread said to give the meaning of AIONIOS based only on Scripture. AFTER I posted you changed it to include AION. But no matter. I'll let you slide on this . . . this time
Now then, you are completely wrong with your first sencence above when you say the UR translation of AION means "age." This is incorrect. AION'S basic meaning just means "duration," that duration being either defined or undefined. We can tell what the actual definition is by using definitive Scriptures. There are definitive Scriptures which state the eons have both a beginning and an end and all the eons end. So by definition as given by the Scriptures themselves, aion cannot have a definition of endlessness. That would be a contradiction in terms.
Quote:
G165
Quote:
αἰών aiōn - ever
In conjunction with eis aion - unto ever, or forever.
None of the three oldest Greek manuscripts, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus or Sinaticus contain αἰῶνα in 1 Peter 1:23.
If they did, it would be translated: 1Pe 1:23 "having been regenerated, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God, living and permanent for the eon." And that makes perfect sense. The word of God is living and permanent for the eon. It is not going to just pass away.
Quote:
We must include both words, as I have said above, since they are directly related to each other in UR's premise of deabte concerning the word(s).
From your quote in the above, since AIONIOS in Romans 16:25, why cannot be it termed "eternal times"? This is a direct relationship of AION and AIONIOS, wherein they both must be discussed.
Why? Because as I stated before, the definitive Scriptures of aion tell us that all the eons have both a beginning and an end and all the eons end. Therefore, that which is aionion/eonian is that which is pertaining to the eon or eons as the case may be. It is impossible for kronois aioniois (eonian times) to be "eternal times" because how can somethng be hid from eternal times? It is just nonsensical! And the very next verse has it that God is the AIWNIOY THEOY (eonian God) in that His Godness is pertaining to the eons. He is over the eons, directing them, subject manking to the goal of each eon.
Quote:
Greek and Hebrew cultures both had a belief in an endless afterlife and used terms based on aion and olam to refer to that "endless afterlife".
So are we going to import pagan philosophies into our bibles? The Greeks also had it that God was a multi-breasted deity. So are we to re-write John 3:16 to say "The multi-breasted deity so loved the world that she gave her only begotten son"? There is not one place in the whole Old Testament where the Hebrews used OLAM to mean "endless afterlife." No, not once. If so, produce it!
Quote:
Let's look at others with AIONIOS in it in regards to God's work and presence:
2 Cor 5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of [this] tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
Is this only temporary?...the house God has assembled?
The tabernacle not made by hands reserved in the heavens is eonian:
2Co 5:1 For we are aware that, if our terrestrial tabernacle house should be demolished, we have a building of God, a house not made by hands, eonian, in the heavens."
The tabernacle is somehow pertaining to the eons. It does not mean it lasts as long as the eons last but that it has some sort of usefulness pertaining to the oncoming super glorious eons.
Quote:
Or what about the succeeding verse of Romans 16?
But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
Does God have an end and a beginning? Careful again?
I already made not of Romans 16:26 which you reference above. It is "according to the commandment of the eonian God" which means He is the God pertaining to the eons in that He is over the eons, directing them, subjecting mankind to the goal He has for each eon. God is not everlasting. He is not just lasting for an ever. The verse is not talking about how long God lasts but is talking about His relationship to the eons.
Quote:
Gal 6:8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting
Is this Spirit, that has gifted us with life eternal, with an end?
If you want you can look up what I wrote.
The life reaped IN THIS LIFETIME is the eonian life or the life pertaining to the eons to come if we sowe to the spirit. Paul tells us to live as if alive from among the dead NOW. Living that way is getting hold of eonian life or the life pertaining to the eons to come. It is like playing house as kids then you grow up and actually enter into adulthood and get a real house and real wife and real kids and real headaches. Likewise we play eonian life now until we actually put on immortality and incorruption and live in the actual eons to come.
Quote:
2 Thess 2:16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given [us] everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,
Is God's consolation to us in Christ have an end?
Well it is eonian or pertaining to the eons. The "good hope" will end and give way to reality where we no longer hope for what will surely come.
Quote:
1 Timothy 6:6 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom [be] honour and power everlasting. Amen.
Christ, who is immortal, has a power that has an end?
That is 1 Tim. 6:16, not 6:6:
1Ti 6:16 Who alone has immortality, making His home in light inaccessible, Whom not one of mankind perceived nor can be perceiving, to Whom be honor and might eonian! Amen!
His might is eonian or pertaining to the eons. One day He is going to give up the kingdom and quit reigning (1 Cor.15:22-28). But until then, He will have honor and might pertaining to the eons. Kings will come and go during that time but not Him!
Quote:
Heb 13:20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,
So you are saying that the covenant in Christ has an end?
"The Hebrew people are the "eonian nation. They inherit an eonian kingdom (Heb.9:15; 2 Peter 1:11), and glory (1 Peter 5:10), based upon an eonian covenant (Heb.13:20) which is made good by an eonian salvation (Heb.5:9), and redemption (Heb.9:12). It is striking, to say the least, that all of this is written of them in those epistles which belong exclusively to them." (A.E. Knoch, Unsearchable Riches).
The eonian covenant, which is a covenant pertaining to the eon or eons as the case may be is not eternal. One day it will not be needed especially when God is All in all.
Quote:
These questions beg an answer from the Universalist.
It appears that the Universalist puts limitations on God, His kingdom, His power, His consolation, and His glory.
What say you?
No, we don't put limitations on God, we just stick with what the Scriptures state about aion and aionios and let the chips fall where they may.
The following is a translation of a part from a writing of the German evangelical professor Ernst Ferdinand Stroeter (1846-1922):
The further accommodations of the author of this pamphlet (against Universalism) really pleased us:
"Likewise is the belief that finally all creatures get saved and become blessed extremely glorious and superior. This alone seems worthy of a God of love. A lot of verses seem to support this view. There is no Christian heart on which this thought isn’t appealing."
We thank our dear brother from the bottom of our heart for such open and manful words. We’re convinced that they’ll find a warm echo at all true children of God.
Why don’t they accept so obviously and clear words like 1 Timothy 4:10, that God is the Savior of all men, specially of those that believe? Where‘s the difficulty? - Can it be cleared through careful studying?
Let‘s hear the author by himself, how he considers the topic as a honest but traditional exponent of the church‘s teaching of endless torment.
He says: "But there is spoken of eternal damnation and eternal torment again and again in the strongest terms. If you want to say that the words for eternal and eternity don‘t always have the meaning of endless duration, then the argument of the great Augustine is true, that when is spoken of life and bliss they can‘t keep their meaning too, and that there could no longer be spoken about eternal life (Mt. 25:46)."
We gladly notice that our brother makes no attempt to deny, that such words of God like 1 Timothy 4:10 teach without doubt that God really is the Savior of all men, not only desires to be. That’s a great benefit for our study. But what’s about the serious stumbling block he mentioned? It’s characteristic, that his only argument is the biblical use of the words that have been translated with “eternal” and “eternity”. This is the adversarial argument, which is the clearest for the common and uneducated reader.
If we can prove from the Bible, in a way that the common man from among the people will understand that the great Augustine and all that use the same argument became victim of a fallacy, then is this biggest stumbling block and most popular argument against the belief that God is indeed the Savior of all men refuted for every straight thinking man.
We forbear from doing a scholarly examination and want to speak to the common people that only know and accept the Scripture. How do we want to prove that Augustine was wrong?
He said: "If the words talking about the doom of the wicked don’t mean endless duration, then the life and the bliss of the saved have also no endless duration."
If it‘s now possible to demonstrate that the Scripture obviously used the words for "eternal" and "eternity" in the same sentence once applied to something that by its nature can only thought to be infinite and the other time on something that by its nature can never be thought infinite, then Augustine’s conclusion can only be considered as unscriptural.
Let’s look upon two Bible words, the one is written in Romans 16:25-26, …according to the revelation of the mystery having been kept unvoiced during eternal (aiōnios) times, but now has been made plain, and by prophetic Scriptures, according to the commandment of the eternal (aiōnios) God…
There is no need for scholarliness to recognize that times in their nature can never be infinite or eternal, but they are obvious with the same word designated that is used to denote the eternal God. On the other hand no one needs to prove that God in his nature can only thought of being infinite.
If Augustine had used the same logic here as in Matthew 25:46, then he could have said, if the times called eternal here were not infinite - then God called eternal here is not infinite too - a blatant fallacy.
We have a similar example in Titus 1:2 (also 2Tim 1:9) …on hope of eternal (aiōnios) life which the God who does not lie promised before eternal (aiōnios) times… If there is a linguistic term that is fundamentally different from infinity, then it is "time" or "times". Nevertheless are they called "eternal" (aiōnios), a striking proof that this adjective itself is not suitable to denote infinity.
All adjectives that refer to God and His life get their true meaning from there, but not the way round. Wherever the word translated "eternal" (Greek: aiōnios - aeonian or age-long), refers to creature, men or mere human conditions or circumstances it never has the sense of infinity cause nothing creatural can be thought of being infinite, unless it partook in the divine nature of divine life and entity.
Our appreciated brother and friend in the adversarial camp concludes now from Augustine’s words: "Nobody has proved yet, that the Scriptures doesn’t teach the infinity of the damnation and torment of the wicked."
After our examination we just want to answer in similar words:
Nobody has sure proved yet, that the words of the Bible teach the infinity of the damnation and torment of the wicked.
Also this proof will never be adduced as long the Scripture alone and not human philosophy has to determine which sense the word translated with "eternal" has.
As long as this proof can’t be adduced without any gap, it is at least very bold to forbid the ordinary children of God believing their heavenly God and Father on his word, that He was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself (2Co 5:19) and that God will be all in all (1Co 15:28).
Hey svenM, here is an article I wrote on Augustine for our Saviour of All Fellowship newsletter (free to all who ask) . . .
Augustine and Matthew 25:46
Augustine gave a couple of reasons why he believed it was in vain that some, indeed very many, in his day, believed there was no eternal punishment:
“It is quite in vain, then, that some–indeed very many–yield to merely human feelings and deplore the notion of the eternal punishment of the damned and their interminable and perpetual misery. They do not believe that such things will be. Not that they would go counter to divine Scripture–but, yielding to their own human feelings, they soften what seems harsh and give a milder emphasis to statements they believe are meant more to terrify than to express the literal truth. “ ‘God will not forget,’ ” they say, “ ‘to show mercy, nor in his anger will he shut up his mercy.’ ” This is, in fact, the text of a holy psalm. But there is no doubt that it is to be interpreted to refer to those who are called “vessels of mercy,” those who are freed from misery not by their own merits but through God's mercy. Even so, if they suppose that the text applies to all men, there is no ground for them further to suppose that there can be an end for those of whom it is said, “ ‘Thus these shall go into everlasting punishment.’ ” Otherwise, it can as well be thought that there will also be an end to the happiness of those of whom the antithesis was said: “ ‘But the righteous into life eternal.’ ”
(end quote)
It may be that many of the early believers in Augustine's day did “deplore the notion of eternal punishment” by yielding to “human feelings” and reliance upon God's mercy. But, was Augustine correct to quote Matthew 25:46 to support the notion of “eternal punishment of the damned and their interminable and perpetual misery''? I say No, he was not.
He is saying that if punishment is temporary then it logically follows that the life for the righteous is temporary as well. But is Matthew 25:31-46 really saying this is about the fate of “damned” vs. the righteous for all eternity? No! This judgment takes place when Christ comes back and sets up His 1000 year kingdom (see also Revelation 20). When Christ comes back (Matt.25:31) He will call the nations to this judgment. They will be judged as to how Christ's brethren were treated. Having faith in Christ or lack thereof is not what they are being judged for. Christ never calls the sheep nations His brothers but He does tell them that they treated His brethren correctly.
Secondly, the “kolasin aionion” or “chastening eonian” which the goat nations must endure is equal in length to the life (zoe aionion/life eonian) in the kingdom which the sheep nations enjoy. When the 1000 year eon ends, both the chastening of the goat nations and the life of the sheep nations end. Then all must appear before the great white throne. The earth is destroyed and I'm sure that some from both groups of the goat and sheep nations will enter into the lake of fire.
But this is not their “eternal” lot, for, one day, death, (the second death) which the lake of fire is called, will be abolished, all will be made alive (be vivified or given immortality), subjected to Christ and God will be All in all, not All in some (see 1 Cor.15:22-28).
Augustine, for all his brilliance, was not given to see certain truths in the Scriptures. While he may have been correct to state that the given psalm was meant to pertain to the vessels of mercy, It is too bad that he did not see the truth of Romans 11:32 how that God should be merciful in the future to those who are enemies to the evangel and stubborn now.
My question for all of you, is to define AION and AIONIOS in the context of scripture alone, that is, no other sources outside of scripture.
Watch carefully, because most of the universalists get the meaning wrong.
Aion means "age"
Aionios means to "age-enduring."
Aionios doesn't reference and end point at all. So to say it means forevermore would be incorrect. But to exclude forevermore would be incorrect also because again - Aionios doesn't mention an END point. BUT what it does reference is a POINT at which things CONTINUE.
So for a universalist to say that it means "pertaining to the age" is incorrect. Let's take the following verse:
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
I bolded the words that are translated from aionios. Once you realize that aionios means to be age-enduring then you see that this punishment spoken of is Punishment that current exists and will continue to exist beyond the present age. Same with the Life. It is life that current exists in the present age and will continue to exist beyond the present age. Notice I say beyond - because Aionios only refers to continuing beyond the age and not to an end point. So when we read that verse we cannot conclude from that verse a limited duration at all or an endless one. We can only conclude that the punishment and the life will continue beyond the age.
Watch carefully, because most of the universalists get the meaning wrong.
Aion means "age"
Aionios means to "age-enduring."
Aionios doesn't reference and end point at all. So to say it means forevermore would be incorrect. But to exclude forevermore would be incorrect also because again - Aionios doesn't mention an END point. BUT what it does reference is a POINT at which things CONTINUE.
So for a universalist to say that it means "pertaining to the age" is incorrect. Let's take the following verse:
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
I bolded the words that are translated from aionios. Once you realize that aionios means to be age-enduring then you see that this punishment spoken of is Punishment that current exists and will continue to exist beyond the present age. Same with the Life. It is life that current exists in the present age and will continue to exist beyond the present age. Notice I say beyond - because Aionios only refers to continuing beyond the age and not to an end point. So when we read that verse we cannot conclude from that verse a limited duration at all or an endless one. We can only conclude that the punishment and the life will continue beyond the age.
Defining aionios as pertaining to the ages doesn't mean the life ends or even that the punishment ends.
If we have life that pertains to the ages, then who's to say that is all it pertains to? The reward is aionios life, or life that is still in the ages. The people that experience aionion punishment do not experience aionion life since they are saved at the end. They do however experience life after that. This life is not aionios life though because the ages are done.
It is never once said 'only aionios life' or 'life pertaining only to the ages' which is what loads of people on here makes this statement out to say.
Watch carefully, because most of the universalists get the meaning wrong.
Aion means "age"
Aionios means to "age-enduring."
Aionios doesn't reference and end point at all. So to say it means forevermore would be incorrect. But to exclude forevermore would be incorrect also because again - Aionios doesn't mention an END point. BUT what it does reference is a POINT at which things CONTINUE.
So for a universalist to say that it means "pertaining to the age" is incorrect. Let's take the following verse:
Mat 25:46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
I bolded the words that are translated from aionios. Once you realize that aionios means to be age-enduring then you see that this punishment spoken of is Punishment that current exists and will continue to exist beyond the present age. Same with the Life. It is life that current exists in the present age and will continue to exist beyond the present age. Notice I say beyond - because Aionios only refers to continuing beyond the age and not to an end point. So when we read that verse we cannot conclude from that verse a limited duration at all or an endless one. We can only conclude that the punishment and the life will continue beyond the age.
I have to say Trettep, I apologize for calling you out several times, as it appears you have correctly translated AIONIOS.
So now, what needs to be addressed is, whether the Universalist, yourself included, believes what age we are in...."this age" or "the age to come"...which scripturally, is the final age that is ....endless.
Dan 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion [is] an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom [that] which shall not be destroyed.
Dan 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom [is] an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.
Rev 22:5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.
These three verses are all identical, in that they are the same kingdom, that never passes away, and continues on for ages and ages...beyond the scope of human understanding of time. This kingdom, is realized post Parousia, post New Jerusalem, post God being all in all.
As a Full Preterist, you all know my answer.
But what say the Universalist in regards to this kingdom?
Does this kingdom have an end point? It says that it never passes away, or is ever destroyed, so that means, or is inferred, that it is endless.
Trettep has rightfully translated AIONIOS and AION in that it has no end, for in human terms and ability to see beyond OLAM and AIONIOS/AION, they cannot. The sole reason for its placement into the scripture. To denote a time unforseeable to the human mind, but that which is only possible for God to indulge in.
What say the Universalist about this kingdom, that never passes?
Last edited by sciotamicks; 02-06-2010 at 11:13 AM..
Reason: typos
I have to say Trettep, I apologize for calling you out several times, as it appears you have correctly translated AIONIOS.
So now, what needs to be addressed is, whether the Universalist, yourself included, believes what age we are in...."this age" or "the age to come"...which scripturally, is the final age that is ....endless.
Dan 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion [is] an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom [that] which shall not be destroyed.
Dan 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom [is] an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.
Rev 22:5 And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever.
These three verses are all identical, in that they are the same kingdom, that never passes away, and continues on for ages and ages...beyond the scope of human understanding of time. This kingdom, is realized post Parousia, post New Jerusalem, post God being all in all.
As a Full Preterist, you all know my answer.
But what say the Universalist in regards to this kingdom?
Does this kingdom have an end point?
Trettep has rightfully translated AIONIOS and AION in that it has no end, for in human terms and ability to see beyond OLAM and AIONIOS/AION, they cannot. The sole reason for its placement into the scripture. To denote a time unforseeable to the human mind, but that which is only possible for God to indulge in.
What say the Universalist about this kingdom, that never passes?
You are right in saying the kingdom has no end, but our rule over it does end:
And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be noend.”
Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.
To check if the oncoming æon is endless, we should consider scripture, I will begin with the book of Daniel:
But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom unto the æon (Hebrew od a olm) and unto the æon of the æons (Heb. u od a olm a olmi). (Daniel 7:18)
Here we see that also in the Hebrew Scriptures is spoken of more than one future æon, the saints shall rule unto or until the æon (eos aionos in Greek) and unto the æon of the æons (kai eos aionos ton aionon), from an universalist understanding, as the æons of æons are the final two oncoming ages prior to the consummation when ALL men will have been made alive in Christ and God will be ALL in ALL (1Cor. 15:22.28), the æon and the æon of æons spoken of in Daniel 7:18 might be the æons of æons, further does the word "unto" (eos) imply a finite period.
Daniel 9:24
Seventy weeks are decreed as to your people, and as to your holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make atonement for iniquity, and to bring in righteousness of æons (Heb. olmim – plural!), and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy (qadosh qadoshim).
Adherents of the doctrine of everlasting torment often insist that Hebrew olm means "eternity", this is easily proven wrong so I will not take the effort here to do so, it is used here also in the plural – æons, the Septuagint renders it with aionios, which I think is valid, as for æons and æonian very likely means the same, it is interesting that "Most Holy" (qadosh qadoshim) is literally "holy of holies" (agion agiōn in Greek), a similar idiom just as "ages of ages", an enhancement - not in quantity but in quality.
Daniel 12:3
And those who act wisely shall shine as the brightness of the firmament, and those turning many to righteousness as the stars into the æon and further (Hebrew l olm u od).
The Septuagint translates:And the wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament, and some of the many righteous as the stars into the æons and still (eis tous aionas kai eti).
Even more remarkable is the translation of St. Jerome, the Latin Vulgate,
QUI AUTEM DOCTI FUERINT, FULGEBUNT QUASI SPLENDOR FIRMAMENTI: ET QUI AD IUSTITIAM ERUDIUNT MULTOS, QUASI STELLÆ IN PERPETUAS ÆTERNITATES.
But they that are learned, shall shine as the brightness of the firmament: and they that instruct many to justice, like stars in perpetual eternities.
Now this verse doesn't bring as further in regard to the ages of ages, it is worth to examine a few facts anyway, there is a time beyond olm or æon, and even beyond ÆTERNUM, see Micah 4:5 (l olm u od; eis ton aiōna kai epekaina; in æternum et ultra) in the Masoretic text, Septuagint and Vulgate.
Also remarkable is the translation of the Septuagint that renders as plural, into the æons and still, this further indicates that "into the æons" (eis tous aionas) does not denote infinity.
Most remarkable is that the Latin bible speaks of multiple ÆTERNITATES (eternities), ÆTERNITAS is one of the strongest terms to denote perpetuity in the ancient languages as far as I am familiar with, and even this word is used in the plural!
I will now continue with my examination with the New Testament:
And He will reign over the house of Jacob into the æons (eis tous aionas), and of His kingdom there will be no end (ouk estai telos).
(Luke 1:33)
The idea that there is only one future æon can in no way be defended biblically in my opinion, most translations render here "for ever" but if into the æons would mean "to eternity" (i.e. endlessness) why should one add that it will have no end, this would be self-evident; I understand it this way, Christ's kingdom will remain even if the æons altogether close, Christ's kingdom is hyperaiōnios, - more than æonian. Also see above, into the æons and still or further in Daniel 12:3.
To Him be the glory in the assembly in Christ Jesus, to all the generations of the æon of the æons (eis pasas tas geneas tou aionos ton aionon). Amen. (Ephesians 3:21)
Again the phrase æon of the æons as in Daniel 7:18, generations definitely belong in the realm of time and finity, it seems almost all translations mistranslated this verse, these generations belong to the æon of the æons, that must be a particular age in a series of particular, not endless, ages - ages of the ages, as it seems to me.
Tyndale (1525) renders it thus: "be prayse in the congregacion by Iesus Christ thorow out all generacios from tyme to tyme Amen."
Wycliffe (1395) renders it correctly: "to hym be glorie in the chirche, and in Crist Jhesu, in to alle the generaciouns of the world of worldis. Amen."
In the King James Version (1611) hardly a single word is rendered adequately:
"Unto him be glory in the Church by Christ Iesus, throughout all ages, world without end. Amen."
Revelation 22:5
And night will not be there; and they have no need of a lamp or a light of the sun, because the Lord God will illumine them. And they [it seems to be Christ and the saints] shall reign to the æons of the æons.
Then the end, when he gives up the kingdom to him who is God and Father; when he shall have annulled all rule and all authority and power. For he (i.e. Christ) must reign until he put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that is annulled is death. For he has put all things in subjection under his feet. But when he says that all things are put in subjection, it is evident that it is except him who put all things in subjection to him. But when all things shall have been brought into subjection to him, then the Son also himself shall be placed in subjection to him who put all things in subjection to him that God may be all in all (1 Corinthians 15:24-28).
Though it is said that the saints and Christ, as I understand it, will rule into the æons of the æons, it also said that Christ will have annulled all rule and all authority and that Christ will give up the kingdom to God and quit His reign; therefore the æons of the æons cannot be endless.
I understand it this way: The kingdom of Christ lasts for the æons [and furthermore], of His kingdom there is no end, Christ and the saints rule for the æons of the æons until Christ gives up His endless kingdom to God the Father, the æons [of the æons] are over; as God will be all in all there is maybe no more need for rule and authority, yet the kingdom of Christ itself is endless, it will have lasted for the æons [of the æons] and will continue to last forevermore.
You are right in saying the kingdom has no end, but our rule over it does end:
And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be noend.”
Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power.
Dan 7 and Rev 22 deal with Post Christ's rule, after His enemies are put under His feet, and the saints are given that kingdom after that, that which is never destroyed. So no, you're wrong...examine the timing, and get back to me....
Quote:
I understand it this way: The kingdom of Christ lasts for the æons [and furthermore], of His kingdom there is no end, Christ and the saints rule for the æons of the æons until Christ gives up His endless kingdom to God the Father, the æons [of the æons] are over; as God will be all in all there is maybe no more need for rule and authority, yet the kingdom of Christ itself is endless, it will have lasted for the æons [of the æons] and will continue to last forevermore.
You too SVEN. You are wrong. This kingdom in Daniel 7 and Rev 22 is post Christ's rule, and that kingdom is NEVER destroyed. Examine the timing in both books, especially the area of the resurrection, and you will see the discrepancy in your analysis.
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.
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.
