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.
The meaning of words that have been translated as “eternal”, “forever”, “incurable” in the scriptures
Sodom's fiery judgment is "eternal" (Jude
7)--until--God "will restore the fortunes of Sodom"
Ez. 16:53-55).
Israel's "affliction is incurable" (Jer.
30:12)-until--the Lord "will restore health" and heal
her wounds (Jer. 30:17).
The sin of Samaria "is incurable" (Mic. 1:9)-until--
Lord "will restore ... the fortunes of Samaria." (Ez.
16:53).
An Ammonite or Moabite is forbidden to enter the
Lord's congregation "forever"-until--the tenth
generation (Deut. 23:3):
Habakkuk tells us of mountains that were
"everlasting", that is -until-- they "were shattered"
Hab. 3 3:6).
The Aaronic Priesthood was to be an "everlasting"
priesthood (Ex. 40:15), that is-until-it was
superceded by the Melchizedek Priesthood (Hebrews
7:14-18).
Many translations of the Bible inform us that God
would dwell in Solomon's Temple "forever" (1 Kings
8:13), that is,--until the Temple was destroyed.
The Law of Moses was to be an "everlasting covenant"
(Leviticus 24:8) yet we read in the New Covenant the
first was "done away" and "abolished" (2 Corinthians
3:11,13), and God "made the first old" (Hebrews 8:13).
God's waves of wrath roll over Jonah
"forever"-until--the Lord delivers him from the large
fish's belly on the third day (Jonah 2:6,10; 1: 17);
Egypt and Elam will "rise no more" (Jer.
25:27)-until--the Lord will "restore the fortunes of
Egypt" (Ez. 29:14) and "restore the fortunes of Elam"
(Jer. 49:39).
"Moab is destroyed" (Jer. 48:4, 42)-until--the Lord
"will restore the fortunes of Moab" (Jer. 48:47).
Israel's judgment lasts "forever"-until--the Spirit is
poured out and God restores it (Isa. 32:13-15).
So, narrow is the way to life and few find it-until--
His church confiscates the "strong man's" booty,
setting the captives free so God becomes all in all
(Isa. 61, Luke 11:21-22, Matt. 7:13; 16:18, 1 Cor.
15:24-28).
The King James Bible, as well as many others, tells us
that a bondslave was to serve his master "forever"
(Exodus 21:6), that is,--until--his death.
You cited a strange translation, especially in Psalm 81:15, I will look at this more thoroughly tomorrow, I admit that the OT overwhelmingly suggests the annihilation of the wicked, e.g. Psalm 92:7 but this destruction might be also be understood as a temporal death penalty.
I know ... it's the NIV 2011.
Other translations of Psalm 81:15
ESV Those who hate the Lord would cringe toward him, and their fate would last forever.
RSV Those who hate the Lord would cringe toward him, and their fate would last for ever.
KJV The haters of the Lord should have submitted themselves unto him: but their time should have endured for ever.
THE TRUE MEANING OF "OLAM" Time and Eternity - Chapter Seven: 'Olam' as Eternal?
INTRODUCTION
"The writer confesses that when he set out to examine the four hundred plus occurrences of 'olam' and its plural the held the view that a number of these, especially those relating to the Deity, would at least support the view that some, if not all, O.T. writers had a concept of eternity for which the term 'olam' was used. That view has been severely shaken, as upon critical examination, passage after passage initially listed as possible examples of 'olam' signifying infinite duration were found in contexts that required the meaning of indefiniteness or obscurity in reference to time. Some folks may say that since God is eternal, whenever 'olam' or any other time term, is applied to the Deity, it must mean eternal. Such specious argument can never lead to valid results."
Last edited by rodgertutt; 05-04-2013 at 03:48 PM..
I know ... it's the NIV 2011.
Other translations of Psalm 81:15
ESV Those who hate the Lord would cringe toward him, and their fate would last forever.
RSV Those who hate the Lord would cringe toward him, and their fate would last for ever.
KJV The haters of the Lord should have submitted themselves unto him: but their time should have endured for ever.
If you do not rely on this translation by yourself, why did you cite it in the first place?
I will address your original post though, as I said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by twin.spin
We do find it... in the prophets and psalms the word forever is used with punishment \ judgement
Deuteronomy 29:20
The Lord will never be willing to forgive them; his wrath and zeal will burn against them.
All the curses written in this book will fall on them, and the Lord will blot out their names from under heaven.
1 Samuel 3:13 For I told him that I would judge his family forever because of the sin he knew about; his sons blasphemed God, and he failed to restrain them. 1 Chronicles 28:9 ...for the Lord searches every heart and understands every desire and every thought.
If you seek him, he will be found by you; but if you forsake him, he will reject you forever.
Psalm 69:23 May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent forever.
Psalm 81:15 Those who hate the Lord would cringe before him, and their punishment would last forever.
Psalm 92:7 that though the wicked spring up like grass and all evildoers flourish, they will be destroyed forever.
I will cite Darby's translation.
Deuteronomy 29:20.21
Jehovah will not pardon him, but the anger of Jehovah and his jealousy will then smoke against that man, and all the curse shall be upon him that is written in this book; and Jehovah will blot out his name from under the heavens; and Jehovah will separate him for mischief out of all the tribes of Israel, according to all the curses of the covenant that is written in this book of the law.
"Never" is not in the Hebrew text, the verse simply states that those Israelites who transgress God's law as commanded by Moses will face punishment. This means the curses uttered to them, which were altogether earthly dooms such as disease, poverty, early death and the like, if I remember correctly. Punishments in the afterlife were no part of these curses that were written "in this book of law" (The Pentateuch, or parts of it).
I have no objection against the translation of the NIV in 1 Samuel 3:13 since it is line with other translations, but "forever" often is used in the Old Testament to merely mean "for lifetime".
E.g. 1 Samual 27:12
And Achish trusted David, saying, He has made himself utterly odious among his people Israel; and he shall be my servant for ever.
Achish hardly expected David to be his servant to eternity, in the afterlife forevermore; thus it can at most mean for a lifetime here, so we cannot infer eternal punishment from Hebrew word l'olam, "forever".
1 Chronicles 28:9
And thou, Solomon my son, know the God of thy father, and serve him with a perfect heart and with a willing mind; for Jehovah searches all hearts, and discerns all the imaginations of the thoughts. If thou seek him, he will be found of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cut thee off for ever.
The expression to cut of from his people was quite frequent, I think it was either the death penalty or banishment, given the loose usage of olam it might be a merely earthly punishment.
Psalm 69:23
Let their eyes be darkened, that they see not, and make their loins continually to shake.
"Forever" is not in the Hebrew, I do not see how this verse is related to eschatological punishment.
Psalm 81:15
The haters of Jehovah would have come cringing unto him; but their time would have been for ever.
I do not understand what this verse is saying, the Concordant Version renders it thus, which is quite in line with the other translations, except the rendering "eon" instead of "for ever".
Those hating Yahweh, they shall cower before Him, And their season for this shall be for the eon.
I will not debate here and now the validity of the Concordant Version. Darby's translation and the KJV I would rather understand, that the time of the haters of God would have been for long if they would not have hated God.
The Luther Bible from 1984, a revison of Luther's own translation renders it thus:
Und die den HERRN hassen, müssten sich vor ihm beugen, aber Israels Zeit würde ewiglich währen, 17 und ich würde es mit dem besten Weizen speisen und mit Honig aus dem Felsen sättigen.
In English:
"Those who hate the LORD would have to bow before Him, but Israel's time would endure everlastingly, and I would feed her with the best wheat and with honey from the cliff."
Israel is an addition to the text but there are other translations that seem to understand it likewise, verse 16 and 17 are understood as one sentence; that's the reason this verse sounded so unfamiliar to me I suppose.
Psalm 92:7 suggests the annihilation of the wicked, rather than everlasting torment, so I will not address it here in great detail, the Hebrew here has "ad" instead of "l'olam" which appears to be an even stronger term.
However various Jewish scholars say that the Hebrew language had not a single word for eternity:
Quote:
Notes From Dr. Fruchtenbaum (Ariel Ministries):
The Concept of Eternity.
The simple, basic truth is that Classical Hebrew, the Hebrew of the Old Testament Scriptures, has no term that carries the concept of "eternity." There are phrases that carry this concept, such as "without end," but there is not a single word that carries the concept of eternity as there is in English.
To focus on the meaning of the term for ever, here are some things to be kept in mind.
First, the Hebrew word is olam. The word itself simply means "long duration," "antiquity," "futurity," "until the end of a period of time." That period of time is determined by the context. Sometimes it is the length of a man's life, sometimes it is an age, and sometimes it is a dispensation.
I am inclined to believe him, in Psalm 73:12 we read (Darby):
Behold, these are the wicked, and they prosper in the world: they heap up riches.
However it says not that the wicked prosper in the world, but the wicked prosper l'olam, "forever" which of course is not for ever for the wicked - you will find hardly find a translation that renders it thus, the Septuagint has eis ton aiona there (72:12 in the LXX, the verse numbers differ), which is claimed to mean "to eternity" (e.g. Mark 3:29), if you do not believe me check it in an interlinear translation.
The ESV comes closer, but does not dare to render "forever" here either.
Behold, these are the wicked; always at ease, they increase in riches.
This limited usage of l'olam is also evident in Exodus 21:5.6 (Darby):
But if the bondman shall say distinctly, I love my master, my wife, and my children, I will not go free; then his master shall bring him before the judges, and shall bring him to the door, or to the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall be his bondman for ever.
This can at most mean "for lifetime" here (the LXX has eis ton aiona), yet Rashi, a medieval Torah commentator limits it to the Jubilee year:
Quote:
and he shall serve him forever: Heb. לְעֹלָם, until the Jubilee year [the fiftieth year of the cycle]. Or perhaps it means literally forever, as its apparent meaning? Therefore, the Torah states [in reference to the Jubilee year]: “and each man to his family you shall return” (Lev. 25:10). [This] informs [us] that fifty years are called עֹלָם. But [this does] not [mean] that he must serve him [his master] the entire fifty years, but he must serve him until the Jubilee year, regardless of whether it is near or far off. — [From Mechilta, Kid. 15a]
So l'olam means here until the Jubilee year, this are at most 50 years, if the last Jubilee year was already let's say 35 years ago, it would mean for the remaining 15 years according to Rashi; I do not know if Rashi is right here, or if actually "for life" was meant; but the point is, a born Jew and Hebrew speaker as Rashi understood l'olam as a period as limited as 50 years or less, which supports my case.
So I think it is fair to say that the doctrine of everlasting punishment cannot be established on the word olam, this equally applies to the corresponding Greek words aion and aionios, you will remember that we had this discussion over and over again. The verses you cited were partly mistranslated or deliberately paraphrased, and even if the translations were correct they would rather support annihiliation than everlasting torment.
I asked you that if eternal damnation were true, why we don't find it in the Pentateuch, the Prophets and the Psalms, with eternal damnation I meant everlasting torment, so where do we find it in the Old Testament? I admit that the OT passages in reference to future punishment overwhelmingly suggests the literal destruction of the wicked, but this desctruction can also be understood as an eschatoligical death penalty since it are not judgments about the dead but the living ones in the end times, but punishment in hell or everlasting torment is nowhere found in the OT.
My Old Testament I own as print version, translated by a Jewish scholar, Leopold Zunz, renders it analogously (I will not quote the German text) even thus:
The haters of HaShem would have to pretend [faith] to Him, their bliss would be eternally.
I know it sounds strange that they are forced to pretend (faith according to the context) and even are rewarded for it, but this is how he renders it, his rendering is quite the opposite of what the NIV says, I think the Luther revision has the most reasonable rendering, the Geneva Bible also supports this (see here, see footnotes there).
Do you realize how much a matter of translation this is and how, depending on your translation, you come to totally different conclusions?
My Old Testament I own as print version, translated by a Jewish scholar, Leopold Zunz, renders it analogously (I will not quote the German text) even thus:
The haters of HaShem would have to pretend [faith] to Him, their bliss would be eternally.
I know it sounds strange that they are forced to pretend (faith according to the context) and even are rewarded for it, but this is how he renders it, his rendering is quite the opposite of what the NIV says, I think the Luther revision has the most reasonable rendering, the Geneva Bible also supports this (see here, see footnotes there).
Do you realize how much a matter of translation this is and how, depending on your translation, you come to totally different conclusions?
Which since historically the Jews ( from shortly after Moses lead them out of Egypt) rebelled \ rejected God and rejected Christ as the promised Messiah, relying on a translation from Jewish scholars would obviously be a red flag (to me) if when considering the possibility of totally different conclusions.
Take for example the Luther Bible you've mentioned, wouldn't a skeptic of Luther have the same misgivings of a translation?
Luther himself admitted (when he put out the German translation) that certain words in the OT\NT had no German equivalent and their were no German words had OT \ NT equivalent.
The NIV 84 is no longer available on-line or is being published, since that was the edition of choice, I will use the current NIV or other translations which are considered "good" by theologians that I'm religiously affiliated with.
Last edited by twin.spin; 05-05-2013 at 08:25 AM..
Which since historically the Jews ( from shortly after Moses lead them out of Egypt) rebelled \ rejected God and rejected Christ as the promised Messiah, relying on a translation from Jewish scholars would obviously be a red flag (to me) if when considering the possibility of totally different conclusions.
Take for example the Luther Bible you've mentioned, wouldn't a skeptic of Luther have the same misgivings of a translation?
Luther himself admitted (when he put out the German translation) that certain words in the OT\NT had no German equivalent and their were no German words had OT \ NT equivalent.
The NIV 84 is no longer available on-line or is being published, since that was the edition of choice, I will use the current NIV or other translations which are considered "good" by theologians that I'm religiously affiliated with.
Zunz' rendering is in fact a bit unlucky, since it suggests that the haters of God are rewarded for their pretense, maybe I have misread it in the context though and "their bliss would be eternally" refers to Israel, which then would be in line with the revision of the Luther Bible; it is ambiguous in Zunz' translation as it is in the Hebrew.
What now? We will not agree, as we did not in the past. You have your translations and teachers you rely on, I have others.
Apparently we have not even a common foundation to discuss. I would accept the Darby translation as a compromise to discuss on its foundation, since he was no universalist (quite the contrary) and you cannot accuse him of any bias in this matter, on the other hand his translation is fairly literal. I do not accept the NIV to be reliable in any matter.
Twin, I asked you that if eternal damnation were true, why we don't find it in the Pentateuch, the Prophets and the Psalms, with eternal damnation I meant everlasting torment, so where do we find it in the Old Testament? I admit that the OT passages in reference to future punishment overwhelmingly suggests the literal destruction of the wicked, but this desctruction can also be understood as an eschatoligical death penalty since it are not judgments about the dead but the living ones in the end times, but punishment in hell or everlasting torment is nowhere found in the OT.
sven, from a ET Calvinistic point of view I don't suppose they would accept your argument as mattering would they? After all, since, according to ET Calvinists, all of the Old Testament non-Israelites were totally depraved and not among the elect, they are all destined to suffer everlasting torment, so why should God bother to warn them in the Pentateuch, the Prophets and the Psalms that that will be their fate? I suppose ET Calvinists might reason that it would be cruel of God to warn them ahead of time that they were going to suffer forever, since there is nothing they could do about it anyway.
BTW I think you are so right about this what you said sven. "What now Twin? We will not agree, as we did not in the past. You have your translations and teachers you rely on, I have others." The debate really does come down to that.
The big difference is that our theology includes Twin in God's salvation, while Twin's theology damns both you and me.
Last edited by rodgertutt; 05-05-2013 at 10:02 AM..
sven, from a ET Calvinistic point of view I don't suppose they would accept your argument as mattering would they? After all, since, according to ET Calvinists, all of the Old Testament non-Israelites were totally depraved and not among the elect, they are all destined to suffer everlasting torment, so why should God bother to warn them in the Pentateuch, the Prophets and the Psalms that that will be their fate? I suppose ET Calvinists might reason that it would be cruel of God to warn them ahead of time that they were going to suffer forever, since there is nothing they could do about it anyway.
BTW I think you are so right about this what you said sven. "What now Twin? We will not agree, as we did not in the past. You have your translations and teachers you rely on, I have others." The debate really does come down to that.
Is Calvinism that prevalent in the US?
I remember how I once discussed with a Catholic, I would not do this again. From a Protestant point of view, they are heretics anyway, why discuss with them -they would not depart from their doctrine, because they follow the pope and tradition. Calvinism from my point of view is as much a heresy as Catholicism if not worse, so I would not take the efforts to discuss with anybody of whom I know he is a Calvinist either.
I thought the majority of US Christians are Evangelical, Evangelical Christians aren't Calvinists, or are they?
I remember how I once discussed with a Catholic, I would not do this again. From a Protestant point of view, they are heretics anyway, why discuss with them -they would not depart from their doctrine, because they follow the pope and tradition. Calvinism from my point of view is as much a heresy as Catholicism if not worse, so I would not take the efforts to discuss with anybody of whom I know he is a Calvinist either.
I thought the majority of US Christians are Evangelical, Evangelical Christians aren't Calvinists, or are they?
I really don't know about how much Calvinism there is in the US.
But I do know that Twin thinks you and I are damned to eternal torment for promoting UR (post #92), while we believe Twin will be saved. What a HUGE theological difference that is!
Last edited by rodgertutt; 05-05-2013 at 10:48 AM..
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.
