The doctrine I don't want to believe-eternal fire

[kennethcadwell]

Sounds like the heresy called modalism, Kenneth.

It is called if somebody wants to debate an issue that is useless to salvation, and will always be debated.
Do not get caught up in these debates by trying to use wisdom, this is in the bible....so just simplify it for them.

Water, ice, and steam....
All different forms made up of the same elements...

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit......
All different forms that make up the Godhead....


Just like in another form, we are all different in how we look yet we all make up the same body of the Church........

 

[Butch5]

Re: OT: Digression on the "Begotten" Mistranslation

There is no room for disagreement. The stem gen- is not the stem genn-, different stems with different meanings.

Now you bring up a vague allusion to some passage & Micah 5:2, neither of which use the term "begotten."

"the words of Jesus Himself," you say. But the whole Bible is His Word; words elsewhere in the Bible are of equal authority to the sayings recorded in the gospels as spoken by Christ.

Micah 5:2 does not refer to an "origin," as the Lord Jesus is the 2nd person of the Trinity, eternal, not having an origin. In the beginning WAS the Word -- not "came to be."

whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting. nothing about "begotten"

Yeah, there is room for disagreement. Firstly are you going to argue that a modern theologian has a better understanding of Kione Greek than a second century believer who spoke it as his native language? It's quoted as only begotten as early as 130 AD. So, that's just one of several avenues that can be pursue to argue against the "one and only" interpretation.

Regarding Micah 5:2, the Greek text plain says the rule of Israel had origins that were of Old. Here is an accurate translation of the passage.

NET Micah 5:2 (5:1) As for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,6 seemingly insignificant7 among the clans of Judah – from you a king will emerge who will rule over Israel on my behalf,8 one whose origins are in the distant past.10 (Mic 5:2 NET)

 

[Butch5]

Atwood posted:
"As to aionios, I have plastered the page with proof texts. And that is the procedure of the BDAG Lexicon, the meanings given have accompanying texts to prove the alleged meanings. It isn't some theoretician postulating arbitrary meanings."




You can ignore what is posted & pretend something else was posted & attack your straw men, as an appeal to obtuseness, but the Scriptures trump your straw men.

You can keep saying things with no proof saying what a word can't logically mean, but it is not logical to believe something just because you keep saying it.

Scripture yes, Butch no!

Sorry, but you've got that backwards. I've already given several passages of Scripture showing that aionios cannot mean eternal. You on the other hand gave a dictionary definition, so to use you're phrase, Scripture No, Atwood, yes!

 

[Butch5]

Kindly refrain from posting falsehood.

Are you being honest?
Prove that God does not have 3 egos, prove that a single being cannot have 3 egos. We wait for the proof.

Am I being honest? Three egos? Are you proposing Modalism? An ego is self esteem or self worth, it has nothing to do with the subject at hand, what we have here is a straw man.

However, please, explain how one being is three.

 

[Butch5]

You surely have experience of that.

I used to when I believed as you do.

 

[Butch5]

Atwood posted: "The Father is the one true God, so is the Lord Jesus, and so is the Holy Spirit. That the Father is God does not exclude the Son. There are 3 egos in the one God."



Please explain how you get "three different beings" from the doctrine of the Trinity. You really accomplish nothing by inventing your own straw man & then questioning it.

I see you didn't explain it, instead you inserted a straw man argument and then accused me of one. It's interesting that you completely avoided the issue. I understand why, it 's because one cannot explain the logical contradiction that is the modern understanding of the doctrine. What's interesting is how many gullibly fall prey to false theology as opposed to rational thinking .

 

[Anonimous]

The Father is the one true God, so is the Lord Jesus, and so is the Holy Spirit. That the Father is God does not exclude the Son. There are 3 egos in the one God.

The proof is absolute in scripture for Christ being God.
First, he has the attributes of God.
Second, He is called God.
3rd, He has the name of God.

Before Abraham was born, I AM.
The audience recognized the claim in John. I AM is a name of God.
Except you believe that I AM, you shall die in your sins.

There is no SAvior, but YHWH; Isaiah is clear. Scripture is also clear that the Lord Jesus is the Savior par excellence.
There is none other name under Heaven, given among men whereby we must be saved.

1Tim. 1:1 God our Saviour,
2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;


4:10 For to this end we labor and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of them that believe.


1:4 Christ Jesus our Saviour.


2Pet. 1:1 Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ:

Titus 2:13 looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ;

As Thomas confessed (no rebuke) to Christ: My Lord and My God!

His name is Immanuel = God with us.
He is El Gibbor, the Mighty God.

At His incarnation He was named Jesus, YHWH-salvation, because He (Jesus) would save! If He were not actually YHWH that would be a blasphemy. But God doesn't blaspheme Himself. To merely get a theanthropic name can be for no higher reason than to commemorate God in some way. But Jesus was given the name of YHWH-salvation BECAUSE He Jesus was going to save. Thus the name itself with the reason given is that He is YHWH the only Savior.

After Christ became a man, adding humanity to His deity, it was given Him in that theanthropic union to have
THE NAME WHICH IS ABOVE ALL NAMES (Philip 2) which is YHWH.

Romans 10:13 makes this clear. For in context "LORD" = the Lord Jesus. But the quote is from Joel where LORD is YHWH. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the kyrios shall be saved. Kyrios (in its genitive form) stands for YHWH. From Hebrew it is rendered, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of YHWH shall be saved."

He is not just called God, but YHWH.

With this you may compare where the NT says that Isaiah saw Christ's glory, but in Isaiah 6 it is YHWH's glory that was seen by Isaiah.

Isaiah 48 puts it all together in words like those of John 1 where in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.


Come ye near unto
[2] me, hear ye this; from the beginning
[2] I have not spoken in secret; from the time that it was, there [2] I AM : and now
[1] the Lord YHWH hath sent me, and
[3] His Spirit.

I AM is a name of YHWH.

Except ye believe that I AM,
Ye shall die in your sins.

Will you now fall back & to your knees on the ground?


John 18: Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus saith unto them,I AM!
And Judas also, who betrayed him, was standing with them.
When therefore He said to them, I AM!,
they went backward, and fell to the ground.

And having fallen down, will you set down your stones?

Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am. They took up stones therefore to cast at him:

Will you confess with Thomas? My Lord and My God!

Well done.......................................

 

[Anonimous]

Some how the thread went from eternal punishment to the trinity. But, think on this. We can try (TRY) to explain the triune nature of God. But, like it or not... it can't be explained or even understood by our limited understanding. And who really Cares? We're not required to understand it. As far as 3 egos is concerned... there are a great deal more here on this site.

 

[Atwood]

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit......All different forms that make up the Godhead....Just like in another form, we are all different in how we look yet we all make up the same body of the Church........

Well Kenneth, I am surprised at you. I thought you didn't trust Christ as Savior (trusting water & works, self-righteously looking to pass some judgment for "salvation" -- actually validation),
but I didn't know that you were a modalist heretic, not even having "Jesus" defined correctly, failing to do the "confession" agreement of Rom 10:9-10.

In the case of the Church, the members are distinct beings. That would be a polytheistic analogy. I do find 2 forms of humans: Adamic, and new creature in Christ, race of Christ, the second being a metamorphosis (transformation) from the first. You appear to never have had that metamorphosis from your posts, no new birth. But then you have supposed that salvation is merely an outcome of an eschatological judgment, contrary to scripture.

They are not different "forms." There are 3 different ego's or persons, but not 3 different forms. You cannot produce one vs of scripture to establish that. Hint: If you want to look for proof, check the words Morphē not and schēma. You might check a standard work on NT synonyms by Trench, who compares the 2 words -- I think the work is online free. I don't know if Biblia.com has it for everyone free or not. I think you may be convinced that morphe (as in metamorphosis) is the deeper term, reaching to the nature, while schema is the more superficial form word. But in no case will you find that the 3 persons of the Trinity are different in either.

 

[Atwood]

Some how the thread went from eternal punishment to the trinity. But, think on this. We can try (TRY) to explain the triune nature of God. But, like it or not... it can't be explained or even understood by our limited understanding. And who really Cares? We're not required to understand it. As far as 3 egos is concerned... there are a great deal more here on this site.

Of course Christians can understand the Trinity. But it is not a matter of understanding vs not understanding; as so often the truth here is not binary, but scalar. We might rate it on a scale of 0-10 -- maybe we are at a 1 ! But we are not at a 0. We can understand that there is but one God. That is an emphatically presented truth in scripture. There would be non imperative upon that truth if we couldn't understand that basically. And we find 3 distinct persons or egos (I's) in the Bible who are all God (YHWH). We can understand that basically.

Now how it all works or what there is to the Almighty, His being & ways are indeed beyond our ken. Yet we do have valid knowledge of God, that which He has revealed -- to the extent that we have studied & meditated on it & been illumined.

I utterly reject the notion that the Trinity is so hard to understand that we should ignore the doctrine & sweep it under the table. WE are admonished to Know YHWH! I think the refrain about knowing the LORD (YHWH) is most reiterated in Ezekiel.

 

[Atwood]

I see you didn't explain it, instead you inserted a straw man argument and then accused me of one. It's interesting that you completely avoided the issue. I understand why, it 's because one cannot explain the logical contradiction that is the modern understanding of the doctrine. What's interesting is how many gullibly fall prey to false theology as opposed to rational thinking .

I didn't make the assertion to which you posed a question. And it is noted that in this post above, as in other posts you make, you prove nothing. You gave not one vs of scripture nor proved a thing from it, you just asked a rhetorical question -- which proved nothing. I wait for you to prove that it is illogical and impossible for One God to have 3 egos.

Now give the proof, or retract your sneers.

 

[Atwood]

I used to when I believed as you do.

You have the experience now, that of not proving a thing.

You never believed as I do, but I used to be like you, a person who did not trust the Lord Jesus as His Savior.

Thou shalt call His name Jesus, for
He shall save His people from their sins.

Except you believe that I AM,
you shall die in your sins.

 

[Atwood]

Am I being honest? Three egos? Are you proposing Modalism? An ego is self esteem or self worth, it has nothing to do with the subject at hand, what we have here is a straw man.\.

Please explain why you keep asking me to explain something I never asserted. If you want an explanation, backquote me.

I do not refer to the metaphorical extension of the word ego. Your post results in pettifogging with a straw man definition of ego. The word ego is the Greek word for I (first person singular pronoun). There are 3 persons to the ONe God, 3 egos, 3 I's.

Now let's see you prove that it is impossible for One God to have 3 egos.

 

[Atwood]

Sorry, but you've got that backwards. I've already given several passages of Scripture showing that aionios cannot mean eternal. You on the other hand gave a dictionary definition, so to use you're phrase, Scripture No, Atwood, yes!

Shall I send you a towel with which to dry your tears of sorrow?

You haven't proven a thing. I posted a systematic exposition of the word aionios by the BDAG standard Greek lexicon with proof texts supplied for the meanings of the word. Then you act as if that post was not of scripture. What a straw man.
Bible yes, Butch & JW's no!

He who being often reproved, hardens his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed & that without remedy.

Except you believe that I AM,
you shall die in your sins.

Denial of Eternal Fire with Aiōnios,
Is Erroneous

αἰώνιος= eternal

John says that the Shepherd gives his sheep eternal life, & they shall never perish. If aiōnios meant "for some temporary period," that would contradict the "never perish." Thus aionios meanseternal, not some temporary period in such contexts. Trying to dismiss aionios as pertaining to some temporary age is a preposterous argument. For God Himself is described as aionios (eternal, not aged).

Consider the data from BDAG Lexicon, which gives many examples both from the Bible & from secular Greek sources. I insert some Greek translation in brackets for those who don't read Greek:

Data from BDAG Lexicon:

αἰώνιος, ον eternal
(since Hyperides [IV BC] 6, 27;
standard epithet for princely, esp. imperial, power:
OGI index VIII; BGU 176, 12; 303, 2; 309, 4; Sb 7517, 5 [211/12 AD] κύριος αἰ.;
al. in pap; Jos., Ant. 7, 352).

1. pert. to a long period of time, long ago
χρόνοις αἰ. long ages ago Ro 16:25;
πρὸ χρόνων αἰ. before time began 2 Ti 1:9; Tit 1:2
in these two last pass. the prep. bears the semantic content of priority.

2. pert. to a period of time without beginning or end, eternal of God
(Ps.-Pla., Tim. Locr. 96c
θεὸν τ. αἰώνιον;

IBM 894, 2 αἰ. κ. ἀθάνατος [undying] τοῦ παντὸς φύσις;
Gen 21:33; Is 26:4; 40:28

Ro 16:26;

of the Holy Spirit in Christ Hb 9:14.

θρόνος [throne] αἰ. 1 Cl 65:2 (cp. 1 Macc 2:57).

3. pert. to a period of unending duration, without end

(Diodorus Siculus
δόξα αἰ. everlasting fame;

in Diod. S. 1, 93, 1
the Egyptian dead are said to have passed to their αἰ. [eternal] οἴκησις;

Arrian, Peripl. 1, 4 ἐς μνήμην αἰ.;

Jos., Bell. 4, 461 αἰ. χάρις = a benefaction for all future time;

OGI 383, 10 [I BC] εἰς χρόνον [to time] αἰ.;

[Reference to journal article:] EOwen, οἶκος αἰ.: JTS 38, ’37, 248–50 )

of the next life σκηναὶ αἰ. [eternal tabernacles] Lk 16:9
(cp. Enoch 39:5).

οἰκία, contrasted w. the οἰκία ἐπίγειος [earthly home], of the glorified body 2 Cor 5:1.

διαθήκη [covenant]
(Gen 9:16; 17:7; Lev 24:8; 2 Km [= 2 Sam] 23:5 al.; PsSol 10:4 al.)
Hb 13:20.

εὐαγγέλιον [gospel] Rv 14:6;

κράτος [strength] in a doxolog[ical] formula (= εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας) 1 Ti 6:16.

παράκλησις [comfort] 2 Th 2:16.

λύτρωσις [redemption / loosing] Hb 9:12.

κληρονομία [inheritance] (Esth 4:17m) vs. 15; AcPl Ha 8, 21.

αἰ. ἀπέχειν τινά [to have/keep someone] (opp. πρὸς ὥραν [for an hour])
keep someone forever Phlm 15
(cp. Job 40:28).

Very often of God’s judgment
(Diod. S. 4, 63, 4 διὰ τὴν ἀσέβειαν ἐν ᾅδου [in Hades] διατελεῖν τιμωρίας αἰωνίου τυγχάνοντα;

Jer 23:40; Da 12:2; Ps 76:6; 4 Macc 9:9; 13:15)

κόλασις [punishment] αἰ. (TestReub 5:5)
Mt 25:46; 2 Cl 6:7;

κρίμα αἰ. Hb 6:2 (cp. κρίσις αἰ. En[och] 104:5).

θάνατος [death] B 20:1.

ὄλεθρον [destruction] (4 Macc 10:15) 2 Th 1:9.

πῦρ [fire]
(4 Macc 12:12; GrBar 4:16. —SibOr 8, 401 φῶς [light] αἰ.)
Mt 18:8; 25:41; Jd 7; Dg 10:7 (cp. 1QS 2:8).

ἁμάρτημα [sin] Mk 3:29 (v.l. [other readings] κρίσεως, κολάσεω, and ἁμαρτίας).

On the other hand, of eternal life
(Maximus Tyr. 6, 1d θεοῦ ζωὴ αἰ.;
Diod. S. 8, 15, 3
life μετὰ τὸν θάνατον [after death] lasts εἰς ἅπαντα αἰῶνα;

Da 12:2; 4 Macc 15:3; PsSol 3, 12; OdeSol 11:16c;
JosAs 8:11 cod. A [p. 50, 2 Bat.];
Philo, Fuga 78; Jos., Bell. 1, 650; SibOr 2, 336)

in the Reign of God:
ζωὴ [life] αἰ. (Orig., C. Cels. 2, 77, 3)
Mt 19:16, 29; 25:46;
Mk 10:17, 30;
Lk 10:25; 18:18, 30;
J 3:15f, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2f;
Ac 13:46, 48;
Ro 2:7; 5:21; 6:22f;
Gal 6:8;
1 Ti 1:16; 6:12;
Tit 1:2; 3:7;
1J 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20;
Jd 21;
D 10:3; 2 Cl 5:5; 8:4, 6; IEph 18:1; Hv 2, 3, 2; 3, 8, 4 al.

Also βασιλεία [kingdom]
αἰ. 2 Pt 1:11
(cp. Da[niel] 4:3; 7:27; Philo, Somn. 2, 285; Mel., P. 68, 493;
OGI 569, 24 ὑπὲρ τῆς αἰωνίου καὶ ἀφθάρτου [incorruptible] βασιλείας ὑμῶν).

Of the glory in the next life δόξα αἰ.
2 Ti 2:10; 1 Pt 5:10
(cp. Wsd 10:14; Jos., Ant. 15, 376.
—SibOr 8, 410 φῶς αἰῶνιον [eternal light]).

αἰώνιον βάρος δόξης [weight of glory] 2 Cor 4:17;

σωτηρία αἰ. [eternal salvation] (Is 45:17; Ps.-Clem., Hom. 1, 19)
Hb 5:9; short ending of Mk.

Of unseen glory in contrast to the transitory world of the senses
τὰ μὴ βλεπόμενα αἰώνια [the things not seen (are) eternal 2 Cor 4:18.
—χαρά [joy] IPhld ins;
δοξάζεσθαι αἰωνίῳ ἔργῳ be glorified by an everlasting deed IPol 8:1.

It is preposterous to claim that all the things above (cited by BDAG) called aiōnios are merely temporary, lasting for an age. The word as used means eternal or everlasting.

BDAG has listed a large number of instances which bear study & comparison. Inductive study is an important principle, as is the Analogy of the Faith. We compare all the data & see how it fits together.

 

[Butch5]

I didn't make the assertion to which you posed a question. And it is noted that in this post above, as in other posts you make, you prove nothing. You gave not one vs of scripture nor proved a thing from it, you just asked a rhetorical question -- which proved nothing. I wait for you to prove that it is illogical and impossible for One God to have 3 egos.

Now give the proof, or retract your sneers.

If you've read this thread this tread, you've read the passages I've posted. Secondly, I said nothing about "egos" that is a straw man that you suggested. I said, three being cannot be one being, which you still have not addressed.

 

[Butch5]

Shall I send you a towel with which to dry your tears of sorrow?

You haven't proven a thing. I posted a systematic exposition of the word aionios by the BDAG standard Greek lexicon with proof texts supplied for the meanings of the word. Then you act as if that post was not of scripture. What a straw man.
Bible yes, Butch & JW's no!

He who being often reproved, hardens his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed & that without remedy.

Except you believe that I AM,
you shall die in your sins.

Denial of Eternal Fire with Aiōnios,
Is Erroneous

αἰώνιος= eternal

John says that the Shepherd gives his sheep eternal life, & they shall never perish. If aiōnios meant "for some temporary period," that would contradict the "never perish." Thus aionios meanseternal, not some temporary period in such contexts. Trying to dismiss aionios as pertaining to some temporary age is a preposterous argument. For God Himself is described as aionios (eternal, not aged).

Consider the data from BDAG Lexicon, which gives many examples both from the Bible & from secular Greek sources. I insert some Greek translation in brackets for those who don't read Greek:

Data from BDAG Lexicon:

αἰώνιος, ον eternal
(since Hyperides [IV BC] 6, 27;
standard epithet for princely, esp. imperial, power:
OGI index VIII; BGU 176, 12; 303, 2; 309, 4; Sb 7517, 5 [211/12 AD] κύριος αἰ.;
al. in pap; Jos., Ant. 7, 352).

1. pert. to a long period of time, long ago
χρόνοις αἰ. long ages ago Ro 16:25;
πρὸ χρόνων αἰ. before time began 2 Ti 1:9; Tit 1:2
in these two last pass. the prep. bears the semantic content of priority.

2. pert. to a period of time without beginning or end, eternal of God
(Ps.-Pla., Tim. Locr. 96c
θεὸν τ. αἰώνιον;

IBM 894, 2 αἰ. κ. ἀθάνατος [undying] τοῦ παντὸς φύσις;
Gen 21:33; Is 26:4; 40:28

Ro 16:26;

of the Holy Spirit in Christ Hb 9:14.

θρόνος [throne] αἰ. 1 Cl 65:2 (cp. 1 Macc 2:57).

3. pert. to a period of unending duration, without end

(Diodorus Siculus
δόξα αἰ. everlasting fame;

in Diod. S. 1, 93, 1
the Egyptian dead are said to have passed to their αἰ. [eternal] οἴκησις;

Arrian, Peripl. 1, 4 ἐς μνήμην αἰ.;

Jos., Bell. 4, 461 αἰ. χάρις = a benefaction for all future time;

OGI 383, 10 [I BC] εἰς χρόνον [to time] αἰ.;

[Reference to journal article:] EOwen, οἶκος αἰ.: JTS 38, ’37, 248–50 )

of the next life σκηναὶ αἰ. [eternal tabernacles] Lk 16:9
(cp. Enoch 39:5).

οἰκία, contrasted w. the οἰκία ἐπίγειος [earthly home], of the glorified body 2 Cor 5:1.

διαθήκη [covenant]
(Gen 9:16; 17:7; Lev 24:8; 2 Km [= 2 Sam] 23:5 al.; PsSol 10:4 al.)
Hb 13:20.

εὐαγγέλιον [gospel] Rv 14:6;

κράτος [strength] in a doxolog[ical] formula (= εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας) 1 Ti 6:16.

παράκλησις [comfort] 2 Th 2:16.

λύτρωσις [redemption / loosing] Hb 9:12.

κληρονομία [inheritance] (Esth 4:17m) vs. 15; AcPl Ha 8, 21.

αἰ. ἀπέχειν τινά [to have/keep someone] (opp. πρὸς ὥραν [for an hour])
keep someone forever Phlm 15
(cp. Job 40:28).

Very often of God’s judgment
(Diod. S. 4, 63, 4 διὰ τὴν ἀσέβειαν ἐν ᾅδου [in Hades] διατελεῖν τιμωρίας αἰωνίου τυγχάνοντα;

Jer 23:40; Da 12:2; Ps 76:6; 4 Macc 9:9; 13:15)

κόλασις [punishment] αἰ. (TestReub 5:5)
Mt 25:46; 2 Cl 6:7;

κρίμα αἰ. Hb 6:2 (cp. κρίσις αἰ. En[och] 104:5).

θάνατος [death] B 20:1.

ὄλεθρον [destruction] (4 Macc 10:15) 2 Th 1:9.

πῦρ [fire]
(4 Macc 12:12; GrBar 4:16. —SibOr 8, 401 φῶς [light] αἰ.)
Mt 18:8; 25:41; Jd 7; Dg 10:7 (cp. 1QS 2:8).

ἁμάρτημα [sin] Mk 3:29 (v.l. [other readings] κρίσεως, κολάσεω, and ἁμαρτίας).

On the other hand, of eternal life
(Maximus Tyr. 6, 1d θεοῦ ζωὴ αἰ.;
Diod. S. 8, 15, 3
life μετὰ τὸν θάνατον [after death] lasts εἰς ἅπαντα αἰῶνα;

Da 12:2; 4 Macc 15:3; PsSol 3, 12; OdeSol 11:16c;
JosAs 8:11 cod. A [p. 50, 2 Bat.];
Philo, Fuga 78; Jos., Bell. 1, 650; SibOr 2, 336)

in the Reign of God:
ζωὴ [life] αἰ. (Orig., C. Cels. 2, 77, 3)
Mt 19:16, 29; 25:46;
Mk 10:17, 30;
Lk 10:25; 18:18, 30;
J 3:15f, 36; 4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2f;
Ac 13:46, 48;
Ro 2:7; 5:21; 6:22f;
Gal 6:8;
1 Ti 1:16; 6:12;
Tit 1:2; 3:7;
1J 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20;
Jd 21;
D 10:3; 2 Cl 5:5; 8:4, 6; IEph 18:1; Hv 2, 3, 2; 3, 8, 4 al.

Also βασιλεία [kingdom]
αἰ. 2 Pt 1:11
(cp. Da[niel] 4:3; 7:27; Philo, Somn. 2, 285; Mel., P. 68, 493;
OGI 569, 24 ὑπὲρ τῆς αἰωνίου καὶ ἀφθάρτου [incorruptible] βασιλείας ὑμῶν).

Of the glory in the next life δόξα αἰ.
2 Ti 2:10; 1 Pt 5:10
(cp. Wsd 10:14; Jos., Ant. 15, 376.
—SibOr 8, 410 φῶς αἰῶνιον [eternal light]).

αἰώνιον βάρος δόξης [weight of glory] 2 Cor 4:17;

σωτηρία αἰ. [eternal salvation] (Is 45:17; Ps.-Clem., Hom. 1, 19)
Hb 5:9; short ending of Mk.

Of unseen glory in contrast to the transitory world of the senses
τὰ μὴ βλεπόμενα αἰώνια [the things not seen (are) eternal 2 Cor 4:18.
—χαρά [joy] IPhld ins;
δοξάζεσθαι αἰωνίῳ ἔργῳ be glorified by an everlasting deed IPol 8:1.

It is preposterous to claim that all the things above (cited by BDAG) called aiōnios are merely temporary, lasting for an age. The word as used means eternal or everlasting.

BDAG has listed a large number of instances which bear study & comparison. Inductive study is an important principle, as is the Analogy of the Faith. We compare all the data & see how it fits together.

You do realize that just because the dictionary says something that doesn't establish it as fact, right? Please show me one single passage that "REQUIRES" aionios to mean eternal.

You see, it's kinda funny, you tell me that I can't rely on those early church writers, but then you post from BDAG as if it's Scripture. I don't think you're going to find anyone who thinks BDAG is inspired. Just because you bought an expensive dictionary doesn't mean it's inerrant.

However, since it seems you haven't read the thread I'll post a passage or two for you.

7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. (Jud 1:1 KJV)

Aionios fire, are Sodom and Gomorrah still burning? Can we bring up Google maps and see these two cities burning? I don't think so.


Here is an ordinance of the Mosaic Law that in the English text is said to be forever.

14 And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whosoever be among you in your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD; as ye do, so he shall do.
15 One ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, and also for the stranger that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the LORD. (Num 15:14-15 KJV)

Are the ordinances of the Mosaic Law eternal? Not according to Jesus and Paul.

Jesus:

15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.
16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. (Luk 16:15-16 KJV)

Paul:

14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: (Eph 2:14-16 KJV)

12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. (Heb 7:12 KJV)

So, aionios is used of things that ended, thus it cannot mean eternal. The word cannot mean both finite and eternal, they are opposite terms. That like saying the same word can mean yes and no. Such a word would be useless in communication.

So, I'll take Scripture you can take BDAG.

 

[Butch5]

Please explain why you keep asking me to explain something I never asserted. If you want an explanation, backquote me.

I do not refer to the metaphorical extension of the word ego. Your post results in pettifogging with a straw man definition of ego. The word ego is the Greek word for I (first person singular pronoun). There are 3 persons to the ONe God, 3 egos, 3 I's.

Now let's see you prove that it is impossible for One God to have 3 egos.

Firstly, you responded to my post therefore I expected you to answer that post. Secondly, it would be helpful if you'd point out that you mean a Greek or English word when the word exists in both languages. I can easily explain how three persons can be one God, however, it seems that many can't. However, since you claim to understand this please feel free to explain. If you hold the modern understanding I doubt you will be able to and instead will turn it back on me so as not to have to explain it.

 

[Butch5]

You have the experience now, that of not proving a thing.

You never believed as I do, but I used to be like you, a person who did not trust the Lord Jesus as His Savior.

Thou shalt call His name Jesus, for
He shall save His people from their sins.

Except you believe that I AM,
you shall die in your sins.

That's interesting since you don't even know me. However, I'm used to the fallacious reasoning when one cannot support their doctrine from Scripture.