The Kingdom of God (part 1 of 2)

     In his epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul exhorts the members of the assembly there, “Do not reject prophecies, yet test all things; hold fast to the good, hold back from every appearance which is evil” (1 Thess. 5:20-22). Unfortunately, modern Christianity has adopted the exact opposite viewpoint, seeing prophecy and eschatology as something that is impossible to fully understand and to be avoided. Others simply idealize prophecy so that it has little to no literal application, something which is also condemned in scripture (1 Pet. 1:19-21).

    Instead of adopting these unbiblical and, frankly, detrimental attitudes toward prophecy, in this series of articles we will look at all of the biblical evidence so as to make a determination about the different eschatological viewpoints held today, using a grammatical-historical hermeneutic [1]. This post will begin by looking at the argument between amillennialists and premillennialists surrounding the nature and timing of the “kingdom of God”, an argument which has far-reaching implications throughout all of the Bible. Many see the kingdom of God as a current reality, a ‘spiritual’ kingdom, whereas others believe that it will find a physical existence on earth following the second coming of Christ, and still others see it as a mixture of the two. Which is correct?

    The Kingdom of God in the Old Testament

In the Old Testament, there were two different meanings to the phrase “kingdom of God”. In the first case, it is though that because God created the universe, His kingdom encompasses the entire universe at all times as He sits enthroned and sovereign over it (e.g., Ps. 103:19; 145:11-13; Dan. 4:3, 34). However, in a more limited sense, Israel is the kingdom of God. Yahweh first promised to Moses that Israel would become a kingdom for God:

“All the earth is Mine, but you shall be for Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. These are the words which you shall speak to the sons of Israel.” (Exod. 19:5-6)

In accordance with this promise, God told David that he and his descendants would rule over His kingdom:

“Your [David’s] house and your kingdom shall endure before Me for the age; your throne shall be established for the age.” (2 Sam. 7:16)

“But I will settle him in My house and in My kingdom for the age, and his throne will be established for the age.” (1 Chron. 17:14)

Judah became His sanctuary, and Israel His kingdom. (Ps. 114:2)

We see, then, that David’s descendants and the kingdom of Israel may also be considered the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God was a literal, physical polity which existed in the land of Israel. From this point forward, the kingdom of David and his descendants is frequently interchanged with the “kingdom of Yahweh”. See the following examples:

“Of all my sons (for Yahweh has given me many sons), He has chosen my son Solomon to sit on the throne of the kingdom of Yahweh over Israel.” (1 Chron. 28:5)

“Then Solomon sat on the throne of Yahweh as king instead of his father David; and he prospered, and all Israel obeyed him.” (1 Chron. 29:23 cf. 1 Kings 2:12; 8:20)

Then Abijah stood on Mount Zemaraim, which is in the hill country of Ephraim, and said, “Listen to me, Jeroboam and all Israel: Do you not know that the Lord God of Israel gave the sovereignty over Israel forever to David and his sons by a covenant of salt?... So now you intend to assert yourselves against the kingdom of Yahweh which is in the hand of the sons of David.” (2 Chron. 13:4-5, 8)

Unfortunately, because Israel and the descendants of David did not listen to God and follow His law (cf. 1 Kings 9:6-7), the kingdom was taken away from them and Babylon took over the land of Israel, followed by Persia, then Greece, then Rome, and even today Israel is still not ruled by a descendant of David. However, God promised that even if the descendants of David failed to listen to His commands, He would not forsake them forever, but would return the throne to a descendant of David - namely, the Messiah - because God cannot forsake His own promises (Ps. 89:30-37).

    The hope of this promise, that God would eventually place a descendant of David on the throne of Israel again, and that the physical kingdom of God would one day be restored, is found all throughout the prophetic books of the Old Testament. They believed that the kingdom of God would return to Israel and be a physical, visible polity which would fill the entire earth.

Now it will come about that in the last days the mountain of the house of Yahweh will be established as the chief of the mountains, and will be raised above the hills; and all the nations will stream to it. And many peoples will come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of Yahweh, to the house of the God of Jacob; that He may teach us concerning His ways and that we may walk in His paths.” For the law will go forth from Zion and the word of Yahweh from Jerusalem. And He will judge between the nations, and will render decisions for many peoples; and they will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, and never again will they learn war. (Isa. 2:2-4)

Then the moon will be ashamed and the sun be put to shame, for Yahweh of armies will reign on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and His glory will be before His elders. (Isa. 24:23)

On that day Yahweh will thresh from the flowing stream of the Euphrates River to the brook of Egypt, and you will be gathered up one by one, you sons of Israel. It will come about also on that day that a great trumpet will be blown, and those who were perishing in the land of Assyria and who were scattered in the land of Egypt will come and worship Yahweh on the holy mountain in Jerusalem. (Isa. 27:12-13)

“For I know their works and their thoughts; the time is coming to gather all the nations and tongues. And they shall come and see My glory. And I will put a sign among them and send survivors from them to the nations: Tarshish, Put, Lud, Meshech, Tubal, and Javan, to the distant coastlands that have neither heard of My fame nor seen My glory. And they will declare My glory among the nations. Then they shall bring all your countrymen from all the nations as a grain offering to Yahweh, on horses, in chariots, in litters, on mules, and on camels, to My holy mountain Jerusalem,” says Yahweh. (Isa. 66:18-20)

“Behold, the days are coming,” declares Yahweh, “When I will raise up for David a righteous Branch; and he will reign as king and act wisely and do justice and righteousness in the land. In his days Judah will be saved, and Israel will dwell securely; and this is his name by which he will be called, ‘Yahweh is our righteousness.’” (Jer. 23:5-6)

This is what Yahweh of armies, the God of Israel says: “Once again they will speak this word in the land of Judah and in its cities when I restore their fortunes, ‘The Lord bless you, O place of righteousness, O holy hill!’ Judah and all its cities will live together in it, the farmers and those who travel with flocks. For I give plenty of water to the weary ones, and refresh everyone who languishes.” (Jer. 31:23-25)

“Behold, days are coming,” declares Yahweh, “when I will fulfill the good word which I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and the house of Judah. In those days and at that time I will make a righteous Branch of David sprout; and he shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth. In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will live in safety; and this is the name by which it will be called: ‘Yahweh is our righteousness.’” (Jer. 33:14-16)

“Then the sovereignty, the dominion, and the greatness of all the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be given to the people of the saints of the Highest One; His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all the empires will serve and obey Him.” (Dan. 7:27)

“Then you will know that I am Yahweh your God, dwelling in Zion, My holy mountain. So Jerusalem will be holy, and strangers will pass through it no more. And in that day the mountains will drip with sweet wine, and the hills will flow with milk, and all the brooks of Judah will flow with water; and a spring will go out from the house of Yahweh to water the valley of Shittim. Egypt will become a waste, and Edom will become a desolate wilderness, because of the violence done to the sons of Judah, in whose land they have shed innocent blood. But Judah will be inhabited for the age and Jerusalem for all generations. And I will avenge their blood which I have not avenged, for Yahweh dwells in Zion.” (Joel 3:17-21)

“In that day I will raise up the fallen house of David, and wall up its breaches; I will also raise up its ruins and rebuild it as in the days of old; that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations who are called by My name,” declares Yahweh who does this... “Also I will restore the captivity of My people Israel, and they will rebuild the ruined cities and live in them; they will also plant vineyards and drink their wine, and make gardens and eat their fruit. I will also plant them on their land, and they will not again be rooted out from their land which I have given them,” says Yahweh your God. (Amos 9:11-12, 14-15)

The deliverers will ascend Mount Zion to judge the mountain of Esau, and the kingdom [of Israel!] will be Yahweh’s. (Obad. 21)

And it will come about in the last days that the mountain of the house of Yahweh will be established as the chief of the mountains. It will be raised above the hills, and the peoples will stream to it. Many nations will come and say, “Come and let us go up to the mountain of Yahweh and to the house of the God of Jacob, that He may teach us about His ways and that we may walk in His paths.” For from Zion will go forth the law, even the word of Yahweh from Jerusalem... As for you, tower of the flock, hill of the daughter of Zion, to you it will come — even the former dominion will come, the kingdom of the daughter of Jerusalem. (Mic. 4:1-2, 8)

For the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea. (Hab. 2:14)

And on that day living waters will flow out of Jerusalem, half of them toward the eastern sea and the other half toward the western sea; it will be in summer as well as in winter. And Yahweh will be King over all the earth; on that day Yahweh will be one, and His name one. (Zech. 14:8-9)

Although there are far more passages than even these which show that the hope of the Israelites which was promised by God was a physical, earthly kingdom to be returned to Israel centered in Jerusalem, the glory and power of which would fill the entire earth, these should suffice to show that they believed it to be a literal kingdom that would exist on the earth. In fact, the prophet Ezekiel provides a detailed description of the boundaries of this kingdom and the temple that would exist in Jerusalem during the Messianic age (chaps. 40-48).

    But was this view, that the kingdom would be a physical polity led by a descendant of David (Jesus) which would be returned to Israel, the view of the kingdom of God in the New Testament as well? Let’s take a look at what Jesus and the writers of the New Testament had to say about the kingdom of God.

    The Kingdom of God in the New Testament

One of the very first things that the messenger Gabriel told Mary about her future son, Jesus, is that “the Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob for the ages, and there will not be an end of his kingdom” (Lk. 1:32-33). This is entirely in line with the hope of Israel that we have seen so far: that a promised descendant of David would one day arise and would restore God’s kingdom to the house of Jacob (Israel).

    When the Jews of Jesus’ day heard that the “kingdom of God” (also, by metonymy, called “the kingdom of the heavens”) was coming, they would have understood this to mean that the promised restoration of the Davidic kingdom over Israel would soon come. This is supported by the reactions of certain Jews in the book of Luke - we are told that, when they saw Jesus, they were hoping that Israel and Jerusalem would soon be redeemed (Lk. 1:65-70; 2:34, 38; 24:21).

    Certainly, it is possible that they were wrong about this; after all, they thought that He would redeem Israel from the Romans at His first coming, even though this will only occur at His second coming. However, the prophecies above are absolutely clear that at some point Israel and Jerusalem will be saved from their enemies, and that the physical kingdom of David will be restored via his descendant, the Messiah. This is supported by the equation of the kingdom of God with Israel in several passages of the New Testament:

“Happy the poor in spirit, for the kingdom of the heavens is theirs... Happy the gentle, for they will inherit the land... Happy those having been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for the kingdom of the heavens is theirs.” (Matt. 5:3, 5, 10)

Through parallelism, this passage equates “the kingdom of the heavens” (= kingdom of God) with “the land [of Israel]”.

Now Jesus said to them, “Verily I say to you, that you who followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man may sit upon [the] throne of his glory, you also will sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has left houses, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or fields, for the sake of my name will receive a hundredfold, and will inherit age-during life.” (Matt. 19:28-29)

The context of this statement is about entering into the kingdom of God (v. 24). This passage, therefore, tells us two things: (1) that the disciples will judge the twelve tribes of Israel in the kingdom of God, and (2) that this will occur in the “regeneration” when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory. The disciples, knowing the prophecies in the Old Testament regarding the restoration of the Davidic kingdom over Israel, would have understood this “regeneration” to be the promised restoration of the kingdom of God over Israel, in which they would be taking part. Since the “regeneration” or “restoration” will occur when Christ is bodily received from the heaven in the same way in which He went up (Acts 3:21 cf. 1:11), the kingdom of God (or at least this aspect of it) will not occur until that time.

“And then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and much glory. Now [when] these things begin to come about, raise up and lift your heads, because your redemption is coming near... when you see these things coming about, know that the kingdom of God is near.” (Lk. 21:27-28, 31)

This confirms that the kingdom of God will come as a future reality at the second coming of Christ.

And to the [apostles] he presented himself alive in many proofs after his suffering, being seen by them for forty days and speaking the [things] about the kingdom of God... Indeed, then, having come together, the [ones] were asking him, saying, “Lord, at this time are you restoring the kingdom to Israel?” Yet he said to them, “It is not yours to know times or seasons which the Father established in His own authority.” (Acts 1:3, 6-7)

The most important thing to note about this passage is that the apostles believed that the “kingdom of God” was something that needed to be restored to Israel. If, as amillennialists believe, the kingdom of God refers solely to the spiritual realm of the ‘Church’, then it would be an entirely new development - not something to be restored, and certainly not to Israel. But if, as the overwhelming testimony of both the Old and New Testaments indicates, the kingdom of God is the Davidic kingdom which will be restored to Israel under Jesus, this statement makes much more sense.

    Although many amillennialists make the assertion that the apostles were still holding an incorrect ‘carnal’ or ‘worldly’ view of the kingdom of God, this is inconceivable. They had just been taught “the things about the kingdom of God” for forty days by Jesus Himself! And even if they had been wrong, why would Jesus not have corrected them? The very gospel which they were preaching depended on a correct understanding of the kingdom of God [2], so if the apostles’ understanding of it had been this blatantly misguided, He certainly would have corrected them before ascending to the heaven. Thus, we must conclude that the apostles’ understanding of the kingdom of God as a literal, physical polity to be restored to Israel was correct.

“Therefore repent and return toward the erasure of your sins, that seasons of refreshing may come from [the] face of the Lord, and that He may send to you the appointed one, Christ Jesus, whom it is indeed necessary for heaven to receive until [the] times of restoration of all things, of which God spoke through the mouth of His holy prophets from an age.” (Acts 3:19-21)

According to this passage, Peter still understood the coming of God’s kingdom to be a restoration even after Pentecost, and to be a future event associated with the bodily return of Jesus from the heaven (cf. Acts 1:11). Furthermore, Peter states that this restoration was spoken of by God through the holy prophets; as shown above, the only restoration spoken of by the prophets was the restoration of the Davidic kingdom over (literal) Israel. Although some amillennialist interpreters have argued that the “times of restoration of all things” began at Pentecost (for example, see here), this is clearly false; Peter, speaking after Pentecost, indicates that this is a future time, and that Jesus will be received by heaven until that time (meaning that those times will only begin once Jesus is no longer in heaven).

    These are not the only passages that show that Jesus and His disciples believed the kingdom of God to be a future reality, in physical Israel. Throughout Jesus’ earthly ministry, He repeatedly presented the kingdom of God as something that had not yet come (e.g., Matt. 6:10; 16:28; 18:3; 20:20-23; 26:29; Lk. 22:30), and the coming of which would be associated with the future judgment (Matt. 7:21-23; 13:39-42; 25:31-34) and the resurrection of the patriarchs (Matt. 8:11-12; Lk. 13:24-28).

    And in stark contrast to amillennialism, which argues that the kingdom began at Pentecost, it is still presented as something that had not yet come even long after that day (Acts 14:22, 26:6-7). Paul and the other writers of the New Testament call the kingdom of God an “inheritance” which we will receive in the future, at the resurrection and second coming of Christ (1 Cor. 6:9-11; 15:50-54; 2 Thess. 1:5-10; Heb. 12:28; 2 Pet. 1:11; Rev. 11:15-18) [3].

    The Millennium of Revelation 20

And I saw a messenger coming down out of the heaven, holding the key of the abyss and a great chain upon his hand. And he seized the dragon, the ancient serpent who is the Adversary and the Satan, and bound him a thousand years. And he cast him to the abyss, and shut and sealed [it] above him, so that he may deceive the nations no longer, until the thousand years may be finished. After these [years], it is necessary [for] him to be loosed a little time.

And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them. Also [I saw] the souls of the [ones] having been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus and because of the word of God, and whoever did not worship the beast, nor his image, and did not take the mark upon the forehead and upon their hand. And they lived and reigned with the Christ a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not live until the thousand years may be finished. This is the first resurrection. Happy and holy [is] the [one] having part in the first resurrection! The second death does not have authority upon these, but they will be priests of God and of the Christ, and will reign with him the thousand years.

And when the thousand years may be finished, the Satan will be loosed out of his prison, and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth, the Gog and Magog, to gather them to the battle, of whom the number of them [is] as the sand of the sea. And they went up upon the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the Beloved City. But fire came down out of the heaven and ate them. And the Adversary, the [one] deceiving them, was cast to the Lake of the Fire and of sulfur, where also the beast and the false prophet [are], and they will be tormented day and night for the ages of the ages. (Rev. 20:1-10)

This is perhaps the most critical passage in the debate between amillennialists and premillennialists. This is because amillennialists believe that the “thousand years” repeatedly referred to in this passage is a figurative time period describing the ‘Church age’, which (supposedly) began at Pentecost - as we will see, this interpretation is riddled with eisegesis. In contrast, premillennialists believe that this thousand years is yet future, and refers to the coming Messianic age during which the Davidic kingdom will be restored to Israel and the promises of an earthly kingdom made to the prophets in the Old Testament will be fulfilled.

    The first thing which we are told in this passage is that the “thousand years” will be a period during which the Adversary is bound, unable to deceive the nations. This simply cannot be the ongoing state of affairs - elsewhere, Paul tells us that the Adversary is the “god of this age” (an age which will end at the second coming of Jesus), and that he has the authority to blind the minds of all unbelievers (2 Cor. 4:4). The Adversary has been very active since Pentecost, certainly not prevented from deceiving anyone: for example, see Acts 5:3; 26:18; 1 Cor. 7:5; 2 Cor. 2:11; 11:14; Eph. 2:2; 6:11; 1 Thess. 2:18; and 2 Tim. 2:26. If the Adversary were currently bound, how could it be said that he is prowling about like a lion (1 Pet. 5:8), and that the whole world is under his control (1 Jn. 5:19)?

    Furthermore, we are told that at the beginning of this thousand years, “they” will sit on thrones and judgment will be given to “them”. Who are “they”? By interpreting scripture with scripture, we can see that at least some of “they” refers to the twelve apostles, who will sit on twelve thrones and judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28). However, as noted earlier, this is said to take place at or just after the bodily return of Christ from heaven (cf. Acts 3:21). Therefore, the thousand years of Revelation 20 must also take place after the bodily second coming of Jesus, something which (obviously) did not occur at Pentecost.

    We are then told that the resurrection of believers, including those who were executed for not taking the mark of the beast’s name, is called the “first resurrection” and will occur a thousand years prior to the resurrection of the rest of the dead. Amillennialists claim that this refers to the ‘spiritual resurrection’ of believers which occurs upon conversion. However, the noun αναστασις which is used here is only ever used of physical resurrection (see for example this concordance), and literally means “rising again”. Although the conversion of believers might perhaps be described as a ‘rising’ of some sort, it certainly would not be said to be a “rising again”. Thus, this must be a literal resurrection which will occur a thousand years before the Great White Throne judgment.

    Finally, the last section of this passage also refutes the amillennial interpretation. Amillennialists interpret Revelation through what they call ‘progressive recapitulation’, as they argue that the book of Revelation describes the course of history between Christ’s ascension and second coming at least seven times using different imagery. Because they see the Millennium as occurring before Christ’s second coming, they require one of these chronological breaks between chapters 19 and 20. However, according to Rev. 20:10, at the time that the Adversary is cast to the Lake of the Fire, the beast and false prophet are already there. Since the beast and false prophet were case to the Lake in the previous chapter (Rev. 19:20), there must be a chronological sequence between the two chapters, and the Millennium must occur after the second coming of Christ.

    In summary, the amillennial position is entirely untenable. In the Old Testament, the kingdom of God was considered to be the Davidic rule over Israel, which (although lost at the Babylonian captivity) would one day be restored to Israel, centered in Jerusalem, and the authority of which would extend over the entire earth. The writers of the New Testament confirm these prophecies, describing the kingdom of God as the physical kingdom over Israel which will be restored upon the second coming of Christ, and is as of yet entirely unfulfilled. This is confirmed by Revelation 20, which shows that this earthly kingdom will last for one thousand years after the second coming of Jesus. Some might say that this view of the kingdom is ‘carnal’ or ‘worldly’. This, however, is a gnostic view which sees the physical earth as evil; from a biblical perspective, the earth is “very good.” Even if it were 'carnal,' though, so what? If God has promised that this is what will happen in the future, then we can be sure that it will.

Part 2: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/08/the-kingdom-of-god-part-2.html

______________________________

[1] For an explanation and defense of this hermeneutic, see this article by Abner Chou. Since all of the prophecies regarding the Messiah’s first coming were fulfilled in Jesus according to this hermeneutic, there is no reason to believe that the prophecies regarding His second coming will be fulfilled any differently.

[2] After all, the gospel which was preached to Israel was called “the gospel of the kingdom” (Matt. 4:23; 9:35; Lk. 16:16 cf. Acts 8:12).

[3] That is not to say that the body of Christ will reign on the earth along with Israel; Paul makes clear that our destiny during the oncoming ages is to rule with Jesus in the heavens (2 Cor. 5:1-2; Eph. 1:3; 2:6-7; 3:8-11; 6:11-12; Php. 3:19-20; Col. 1:5; 2 Tim. 4:18). However, our hope and expectation is the same as Israel in the sense that we, too, will be citizens of the Davidic “kingdom of God” (cf. Acts 26:6-7; 28:20). This is because the authority and rule of Jesus, the Messiah and Davidic king, will extend throughout the heavens as well as the earth (Rev. 12:10 cf. Col. 1:15-20).

Is 1 Cor. 8:6 a modified Shema?

    A trinitarian claim that I have been encountering more and more often as of late is that 1 Corinthians 8:6, which is perhaps one of Paul’s clearest declarations of his unitarian faith, is actually meant to include Jesus in the Israelite “Shema” - and therefore declare that He is Yahweh (for example, see here for a trinitarian making this claim). However, this claim goes directly against the immediate context of this passage. Let’s take a look at why 1 Cor. 8:6 is not proof that Jesus is God, and instead is one of the clearest passages that shows that the Father alone is the one true God, Yahweh.

    Here are the two passages in question:

Hear, O Israel! Yahweh [is] our God, Yahweh [is] one. (Deut 6:4 cf. Mk. 12:29)

Yet to us [is] one God, the Father, out of whom [are] the all things, and we for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] the all things, and we through him. (1 Cor. 8:6)

Trinitarians correctly note that the Greek title κυριος (“Lord”) is the translation of the Hebrew name YHWH (Yahweh) as it is used throughout the New Testament. However, their claim is that when Paul states that “there is one God, the Father... and one Lord, Jesus Christ”, he is modifying the Shema to include Jesus Christ, and is using the title “Lord” to mean Yahweh. They argue that it should be read as

Yet to us [is] one God, the Father... and one Yahweh, Jesus Christ.

However, this claim completely fails to stand up to the surrounding context. If we look at the larger context before and after Paul’s claim in 1 Cor. 8:6, we see that the interpretation of “one Lord” as “one Yahweh” completely misunderstands and ruins Paul’s argument here.

Concerning, then, the eating of the [things] offered to idols, we know that an idol [is] nothing in [the] world, and that [there is] no God except one. For even if there are [those] called gods, whether in heaven or upon earth, just as there are many gods and many lords, yet to us [is] one God, the Father, out of whom [are] the all things, and we for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] the all things, and we through him. But not in all [is] this knowledge. (1 Cor. 8:4-7)

According to Paul, although the pagans acknowledge the existence of many gods and many lords, there is in reality only one true God - the Father - and one true Lord, Jesus Christ. The one God, the Father, is used as a direct parallel to the “many gods” that the pagans acknowledge, and the one Lord, Jesus Christ, is used as a direct parallel to the “many lords” that the pagans acknowledge. If, as those who take 1 Cor. 8:6 as a modified Shema argue, this is describing Jesus as Yahweh, we would have to understand this passage as saying that

Just as there are many gods and many Yahwehs, yet to us [is] one God, the Father... and one Yahweh, Jesus Christ.

Clearly, this is an absurdity. The κυριοι, or human lords, of the pagans are certainly not Yahwehs, whatever that would mean; and neither do the pagans acknowledge the existence of many “Yahwehs”, but at most one god whose name is Yahweh among many other gods.

    Furthermore, if the “God” of the Shema is understood to be the Father and the “Yahweh” of the Shema to be Jesus Christ, per the trinitarian interpretation of this verse, then we would have to understand the Shema as saying: “Jesus Christ [is] the Father, Jesus Christ [is] one”. This completely backfires on trinitarians; instead of supporting the doctrine of the Trinity, we now have a prooftext for modalism (the belief that the Father, Jesus, and the holy spirit are all one person). Otherwise, we would have to exclude the Father from being Yahweh, which is also clearly false, as Jesus repeatedly identifies His Father with the one God of Israel, Yahweh (Mk. 12:29-30; Jn. 8:54; 20:17). So then, even if 1 Cor. 8:6 is to be understood as a modified Shema (which is completely contradicted by the context), this would prove modalism, not trinitarianism.

    So then, what was Paul trying to say in 1 Corinthians 8:6? It should be rather obvious from the context: just as to the pagans, there are many gods - divine rulers - to us there is only one God or divine ruler, the Father; and just as there are many lords - human rulers - to us there is only one Lord or human ruler, Jesus Christ. The Greek word κυριος translates three separate Hebrew words: adoni (human lords), Adonai (the Lord God), and YHWH (Yahweh). Since the human lords of the pagans are adoni (certainly not Adonai or YHWH) so also our one Lord, Jesus, is an adoni [1]. This is confirmed by Psalm 110:1, which characterizes the future Messiah as an adoni, and is quoted or referenced no less than twenty-four times in the New Testament [2].

    Rather than being a trinitarian statement, 1 Cor. 8:4-6 is clearly one of the most unitarian statements made by Paul in his epistles. In it, he identifies the one God of the Shema with the Father alone, and makes it clear that there can be no other God than Him; after all, “there is no God except one”. Furthermore, he contrasts the human lords (adoni in Hebrew) of the pagans with our one Lord Jesus Christ, thus showing that Jesus is the only human who can properly be called our Lord; He is our one adoni, not Adonai. This passage provides some of the strongest evidence that Paul was a unitarian and not a trinitarian as modern Christians claim.

[EDIT: After writing this in early May, I have now (mid-June) become far more sympathetic to trinitarianism. Although I will not yet go so far as to say that I affirm the full deity of Christ, as I go through my earlier posts on the Trinity and Christ’s deity, I have noticed many inconsistencies and problems with my arguments. What follows is a rebuttal of my previous claims.]

    I stand by my previous assertion that 1 Corinthians 8:6 is not a Christian re-formulation of the Jewish Shema. It would be meaningless nonsense for Paul to claim that Jesus is the “one Yahweh” over against the “many Yahwehs” (?) of the pagans. However, I now see this passage as one of the strongest arguments for Paul’s belief in the deity of Christ. Let me explain...

    In the original version of this post, I appealed to the Hebrew (which Paul, being a Jew, would have been very familiar with while writing this) as possibly stating that Jesus is an adoni (human lord) like the multiple human lords of the pagans that Paul is contrasting Him with. However, what I missed while writing this is the clear parallelism between v. 5 and v. 6, which provides evidence that Paul was calling Jesus Adonai (i.e., Lord God) rather than adoni. Consider the following:

Just as there are many elohim and many adonai, yet to us [is] one Elohim, the Father... and one adoni, Jesus Christ.

This is what I first claimed that Paul would have had in mind while writing this passage. According to my previous interpretation, Paul was contrasting the pagan human lords with the human lord of the Christians, Jesus Christ. However, in Hebrew, the plural of el (‘god’) is elohim, which is also the title of Yahweh - Elohim (lit. ‘gods’). Likewise, in Hebrew, the plural of adoni (‘lord’) is adonai, which is also the title of Yahweh - Adonai (lit. ‘lords’).

    Paul is consistent in contrasting the multiple gods (elohim) with the one God (Elohim). If Paul was merely calling Jesus a human lord, as I thought before, he would have been contrasting multiple lords (adonai) with one human lord (adoni). The parallelism is lost! But if Paul was calling Jesus the Lord God, and not merely a human lord, then he was instead contrasting multiple lords (adonai) with the one Lord (Adonai). Now, the parallelism is regained! Paul is contrasting elohim with Elohim, and adonai with Adonai (and not adonai with adoni).

Just as there are many elohim and many adonai, yet to us [is] one Elohim, the Father... and one Adonai, Jesus Christ.

Furthermore, earlier in the same context, Paul states that worshipping anyone except the one true God is simply idolatry (v. 4). Would it really make sense for Paul to then introduce someone who is not the one true God, who should nevertheless be worshipped? Not at all. But if he is introducing One Who, though not being the Father, is nevertheless the one true God (the Adonai), then consistency is restored to his logic! Worshipping any lesser god or lord is simply idolatry; only the one true God and Lord, Who is both the Father and Jesus Christ, is to be worshipped.

    So, is 1 Cor. 8:6 a re-formulated Shema? No. But neither is it a blatant statement of unitarianism, as I previously thought. Instead, Paul appears to be affirming something very similar, if not identical, to ‘orthodox’ conceptions of trinitarianism (or at least binitarianism); he is stating that the one true God (Elohim) and Lord (Adonai) is to be found in at least two persons, the Father and Jesus Christ, both of Whom should be worshipped instead of any lesser god or lord. The fact that the Father is consistently called God whereas Jesus is consistently called Lord does not show that Jesus is not God; rather, both God and Lord are titles of Yahweh. Indeed, the fact that two different titles are typically used by the Father and Jesus respectively is to be expected under trinitarianism, to avoid confusing these two separate Persons.

EDIT 2: After carefully looking at every passage that has been used to support trinitarianism, I no longer believe in the Trinity or the deity of Jesus (as of 24 December 2022). The fact is that neither of these doctrines can be found in the Bible.

With regard to 1 Corinthians 8:6 specifically, I was wrong to suggest that the Hebrew terms elohim, adon, and adonai were relevant at all; Paul was writing to a church of Greek-speaking Greeks, not Jews. So when he says that there is "one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus the Messiah," we should take it at face value — the Father just is the one God, and Jesus is our one human lord.

______________________________

[1] As Aaron Welch writes, “the very thing that allowed Paul to refer to Christ – but not the Father – as the “one Lord” in v. 6 is that Christ doesn’t have the same divine status as the Father. By virtue of not having divinity, Christ can’t be contrasted with the “many gods” of v. 5. Only the Father (who possesses divinity) is a suitable contrast to the “many gods” of v. 5. And yet Christ can be contrasted with the “many lords,” because he is the only non-divine person (i.e., the only person subordinate to the one God) who is our Lord.“

[2] Matt. 22:44, 26:64, Mk. 13:36, 14:62, 16:19, Lk. 20:42-43, 22:69, Acts 2:34-35, 5:31, 7:55-56, Rom. 8:34, 1 Cor. 15:25, Eph. 1:20, Col. 3:1, Heb. 1:3, 13, 8:1, 10:12-13, 12:2, 1 Pet. 3:22-24

Just how long is ‘eternal’? A study on the meanings of Αιων and Αιωνιος (part 5 of 5)

Part 4: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/07/just-how-long-is-eternal-study-on_01876064027.html

     Now that we have extensively looked at the usage of the terms olam, αιων, and αιωνιος throughout the Old and New Testaments, and examined (and refuted) the arguments that have been put forth in favor of the traditional translation of these terms as “everlasting,” “eternal,” and “for ever,” we are in a far better position to take a look at the passages thought to prove that punishment is everlasting. The ten passages considered here are taken from this article by Justin Taylor.

    1. Undying Worm and Unquenchable Fire (OT)

“For as the new heavens and new earth that I will make shall remain before Me,” says Yahweh, “so also your descendants and your name shall remain. And it shall come to pass, from one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, all flesh shall come to worship before me,” says Yahweh. “And they shall go forth and look upon the corpses of the men who have transgressed against Me, for their worm does not die, and their fire is not quenched. And they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh.” (Isa. 66:22-24)

    It is interesting that this passage was brought up, because it does not actually explicitly describe the punishment as everlasting by any translation. However, some believe that because it is said that the worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched, the punishment must never end. I already wrote quite a lot about this passage in another post on the nature of Gehenna:

First of all, in this passage we are told that all nations and people will come to Jerusalem to worship YHWH during the Messianic age [see v. 20]. While they are in Jerusalem, they will be able to see those who are in Gehenna, which confirms that “Gehenna” cannot refer to ‘hell’ or the Lake of Fire, and must be the physical Valley of Hinnom that is adjacent to Jerusalem.

Second, we are told that there will be corpses - not living humans, but corpses - of those who have transgressed against YHWH, and that it is their worm that does not die, and their fire that is not being quenched. This proves that Gehenna will not be a place of conscious torment, but simply a place where the dead bodies of the wicked and unbelievers will be cast and burned. The “worm” spoken of here (tola in Hebrew and σκοληξ in Greek) cannot be some sort of ‘spiritual worm’ that punishes those in ‘hell’, as these words simply refer to maggots which eat the flesh off of dead bodies [3]. This Hebrew word, tola, is used as a symbol of death and decay throughout the Old Testament (Exod. 16:20, Deut. 28:39, Isa. 14:11)...

[3] This “worm” does not die, not because it is immortal, but to emphasize the completeness of the decay of these bodies; the maggots will not die until every bit of flesh is picked clean. See this article written from an annihilationist viewpoint.

    It is also said that the fire is not quenched, but this does not mean that the fire will never go out, merely that it will not be put out by human means. Elsewhere in scripture, fires are called unquenchable which have since gone out (see Lev. 6:12-13; Isa. 34:10; Jer. 17:27; Ezek. 20:46-48). And since the punishment being discussed here is something that will be confined to the Valley of Hinnom on the current earth, near Jerusalem (see above), the fire must eventually go out when the current earth is destroyed and all things are made new (1 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 20:11; 21:1, 5). Therefore, this passage does not prove that punishment is everlasting; the punishment being spoken of in this passage is confined to the Messianic age.

    2. Everlasting Life/Everlasting Contempt

“And at that time Michael shall stand up, the great prince who stands over the sons of your people, and there shall be a time of trouble such as never was - since there was a nation even to that time - and at that time your people shall be delivered, every one who is found written in the book. And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to life olam, and some to reproach [and] abhorrence olam.” (Dan. 12:1-2)

    The most common objection to universalism from this passage is that, because the reproach and abhorrence of the ungodly is described as olam, it must never have an end. However, this is false, because as we saw in the first two parts of this study, olam simply means a period of indefinite length, and rarely — if ever — describes an everlasting period. It was used to describe periods as short as three days (Jon. 2:6), or as long as the duration of the earth (Ecc. 1:4), but most commonly to describe periods of time around the length of a single human lifespan or several generations.

    We should see this passage as stating that the abhorrence and reproach of the ungodly will continue indefinitely into the future, but not forever. Unfortunately, most Bible versions obscure this by translating olam as “eternal,” and so readers of English translations of scripture are left without a proper understanding of this crucial fact.

    The second argument is slightly more sophisticated, and states that because the olam life spoken of in this passage is everlasting, by parallelism the olam reproach and abhorrence must also be everlasting. First of all, this argument is based on the false premise that two instances of the same word (either olam or αιωνιος) in the vicinity of one another must mean the exact same thing — for a refutation of this premise, see my comments on Matthew 25:46 below.

    However, even if we grant that some sort of parallelism may be present in this passage, this doesn’t mean that the reproach and abhorrence must be everlasting. The LXX translates chayye olam as “life of the Age” (ζωη αιωνιος), which is used in the New Testament to describe living and reigning with Christ, and will have an end at the time prophesied in 1 Cor. 15:24-28 (see the third section of this study). Although we will be immortal, this is not encapsulated in either expression — chayye olam or ζωη αιωνιος — but is prophesied in other passages (e.g., Lk. 20:36; 1 Cor. 15:51-54; Heb. 7:16). Thus, the olam life (“age-during life”) of Daniel 12:2 will eventually end. If this is a parallelism, it does not prove everlasting punishment, but instead provides evidence that the punishment will end. Therefore, this passage definitely does not prove that punishment will be everlasting.

    3. Eternal Fire/The Fire of Hell

“Now whoever may offend one of these little [ones] believing in me, it is better for him that a heavy millstone may be hung around his neck, and he may be sunk in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of the offenses! For the offenses [are] necessary to come, but woe to the man through whom the offense comes! Now if your hand or your foot offends you, cut it off and cast it from you. It is good for you to enter into the life crippled or lame, rather [than] to be cast to the age-during fire having two hands or two feet. And if your eye offends you, take it out and cast it from you. It is good for you to enter into the life one-eyed, rather [than] to be cast to the Gehenna of the fire having two eyes.” (Matt. 18:6-9)

    This passage describes the Gehenna of the fire (which is a reference to the physical Valley of Hinnom adjacent Jerusalem) as “the age-during fire” (το πυρ το αιωνιον). Because it is thought that αιωνιος means “everlasting,” non-universalists believe that this passage teaches that Gehenna will be a place where punishment is everlasting (whether the fire itself is everlasting, or merely the destructive effects of the fire, is debated between infernalists and annihilationists).

    However, as seen previously in this study, the adjective αιωνιος rarely if ever describes an everlasting period. Instead, throughout the New Testament, it is used to describe things which pertain to the ages. Every noun which is modified by this adjective throughout the NT can be shown to have an end (including ζωη αιωνιος, “life of the [Messianic] Age” which will end when Christ returns the kingdom to the Father), excluding God Himself. There is no reason to believe that this age-during fire is any exception. And the fact that it is Gehenna being referred to shows that αιωνιος cannot mean “everlasting” in this context, for Gehenna (the Valley of Hinnom) will one day become holy to God (Jer. 31:40) and will then be destroyed along with the rest of the earth (1 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 20:11; 21:1, 5).

    4. Eternal Punishment/Eternal Life

“Now when the Son of Man may come in his glory, and all the messengers with him, then he will sit on [the] throne of his glory. And all the nations will be assembled before him, and he will separate them from one another, just as the shepherd separates the sheep from the kids. And he will indeed set the sheep on his right hand, and the kids on [the] left. Then the King will say to the [ones] on his right hand, ‘Come, those blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from [the] foundation of [the] world’... Then he will say to the [ones] on [the] left, ‘Go from me, those cursed, to the age-during fire prepared for the Adversary and his messengers’... And these will go away into age-during punishment, but the righteous into age-during life.” (Matt. 25:31-34, 41, 46)

    This passage is interpreted by non-universalists in the same way as Daniel 12:2. Because the punishment in this passage is described as αιωνιος, which is taken to mean “everlasting,” supposedly there can be no end to this punishment. However, as we have seen, this argument is inane and superficial, and does not stand up to the use of αιωνιος throughout the rest of the Bible as referring to either an indefinite (but not infinite) period of time, or to something which pertains to the ages.

    In fact, as I showed in another post, the context clearly refutes the traditional interpretation of the judgment in Matthew 25:31-46. The judgment will occur just after the end of the tribulation, at the second coming of Christ (v. 31), will be a judgment of the nations, meaning the Gentile unbelievers who survive the battle of Armageddon (v. 32), and they will be judged on how they treated Jesus’ brethren (the Israelites), not on whether they had a saving faith (v. 40).

    The parallel description of the same judgment in Joel 3:1-8 shows that the punishment of the “goats” is not literal fire, but being cast far outside the Messianic kingdom and treated as slaves (cf. Zech. 14:17-19; Rev. 2:27; 19:15), the same punishment elsewhere referred to as “outer darkness” and “a furnace of fire” (Matt. 8:11-12; 13:40-42, 49-50; Lk. 13:28-29). Fire is commonly used in scripture to figuratively describe times of adversity (Deut. 4:20; Isa. 48:10; Ezek. 22:20; 1 Pet. 1:7; 4:12). Likewise, the reward of the “sheep” is also limited to the Messianic age, and refers to their having an inheritance in the Messianic kingdom in Israel (cf. Ezek. 47:22-23).

    Thus, neither the “punishment of the Age” nor the “life of the Age” referred to in Matt. 25:46 are everlasting; they are both confined to the Messianic age. However, even if the “life of the Age” were truly eternal, this would not prove that the “punishment of the Age” is also eternal by parallelism, as many non-universalists often assert. See the following passages:

And He stood and shook the earth, and He looked and startled the nations. The mountains [went] to violence, the age-during hills melted [at] His age-during ways. (Hab. 3:6-7 LXX)

Now to Him [who] is able to establish you, according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to a revelation of a mystery, [which] has been kept silent in times of ages, but now manifested, and through the prophetic scriptures, according to a command of the age-during God, for obedience of faith [which] was made known to all the Gentiles (Rom. 16:25-26)

    In both of these cases, something which is undeniably not everlasting is described as age-during in the immediate vicinity of something which is undeniably everlasting being described as age-during. The hills which are age-during are said to melt in the presence of the God whose ways are age-during. The gospel kept silent in times of ages (χρονοις αιωνιοις) has now been manifested by a command of the age-during God (του αιωνιου θεου). Therefore, even if the “life of the Age” of Matt. 25:46 is everlasting, the “punishment of the Age” does not need to also be everlasting. This passage does not prove that the punishment of unbelievers will never end.

    5. Undying Worm and Unquenchable Fire (NT)

“And whoever may offend one of these little [ones] believing in me, it is more good for him if a heavy millstone is put around his neck and he has been cast to the sea. And if your hand may offend you, cut it off. It is good for you to enter into the life crippled, rather [than] to go away to the Gehenna, to the unquenchable fire, having two hands. And if your foot may offend you, cut it off. It is good for you to enter into the life lame, rather [than] to be cast to the Gehenna having two feet. And if your eye may offend you, cast it out. It is good for you to enter into the kingdom of God one-eyed, rather [than] having two eyes, to be cast to the Gehenna, where ‘their worm is not dying, and the fire is not quenched’.” (Mk. 9:42-48)

    I already dealt with this argument for everlasting punishment in my discussion on Isaiah 66:22-24, so I won’t reiterate the points I made there. However, this point cannot be stressed enough, that by Gehenna the literal Valley of Hinnom near Jerusalem is meant (see Isa. 64:20-24) — the same valley of which it is said that it will eventually become holy to God (Jer. 31:40), and which must eventually be destroyed along with the rest of the earth (1 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 20:11; 21:1, 5). Thus, the fire within Gehenna cannot truly last forever. The undying worm and unquenchable fire are meant to emphasize the totality of decay and desecration of the bodies cast within, not the length of time for which the punishment is applied. After all, other so-called “unquenchable” fires have long since gone out (e.g., Lev. 6:12-13, Isa. 34:10, Jer. 17:27, Ezek. 20:46-48).

    6. Everlasting Destruction

[This is] a proof of the righteous judgment of God, for you to be deemed worthy of the kingdom of God, and on behalf of which you suffer. Indeed [it is] righteous with God to recompense those afflicting you with affliction, and to you, the [ones] oppressed, relief with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful messengers, in a flame of fire giving vengeance to those [who] have not known God and to those not obeying the gospel of our Lord Jesus, who will pay a penalty of age-during destruction from [the] face of the Lord and the glory of his power, when he may come to be glorified in his saints and to be marveled at in all those [who] believed, because our testimony to you was believed in that day. (2 Thess. 1:5-10)

    It is argued that this passage proves that the punishment of unbelievers (whether torment or annihilation) will never have an end, because it describes their destruction as αιωνιος (“age-during”). However, as we have seen, this argument fails because αιωνιος does not mean “everlasting,” but refers to those things which pertain to the ages, and in all instances describes things which do have an end (with the sole exception of God Himself). This passage is no exception, especially because the destruction of these unbelievers will end (or at least cease for a time) when they are resurrected one thousand years later to the Great White Throne judgment (Rev. 20:11-15).

    7. The Punishment of Eternal Fire

...just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, [in] like manner with them having committed prostitution and having gone away after other flesh, are set [as] an example, undergoing a penalty of age-during fire. (Jude 7)

    This passage is thought to prove that the punishment of unbelievers, specifically of Sodom and Gomorrah, will never have an end because the fire in which they are penalized is described as αιωνιος. Again, this argument fails because αιωνιος does not describe everlastingness, but instead describes things which pertain to the ages. However, that argument fails even more spectacularly when applied to this passage specifically, because we know that the fire which burned Sodom and Gomorrah no longer burns. In fact, the prophet Ezekiel tells us that one day Sodom will be restored to its former glory (Ezek. 16:53-55)! Thus, Jude 7 is actually further proof that the punishment of unbelievers will, eventually, have an end.

    8. Blackest Darkness Reserved Forever

[These false teachers are] fierce waves of [the] sea, foaming out their shame; wandering stars, to whom the gloom of the darkness has been kept for an age. (Jude 13)

    Most Bible versions translate “for an age” (εις αιωνα) as “for ever,” which leads uninformed readers to think that these false teachers will be kept in the gloom of darkness for eternity. However, the expression “for an age” or “for the age” does not refer to an everlasting period, as numerous examples from the LXX and the New Testament demonstrate; rather, when used in the eschatological sense, it refers to something which lasts for a single eschatological age (most often referring to the coming Messianic age). And in fact, just a few verses later, Jude acknowledges more than one age to come (v. 25), so the fact that the gloom of darkness is reserved for only “an age [singular]” is proof that this does not describe an everlasting punishment.

    9. The Smoke of Their Torment Rises for Ever and Ever

And another messenger, a third, followed them, in a great voice saying, “If someone worships the beast and its image, and takes a mark upon his forehead or upon his hand, he will also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, having been mixed undiluted in the cup of His anger. And he will be tormented in fire and sulfur, before holy messengers and the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment rises up for ages of ages; and [they] do not have rest day and night, those worshipping the beast and its image, and if someone takes the mark of its name.” (Rev. 14:9-11)

    Because most Bible versions translate “for ages of ages” (εις αιωνας αιωνων) as “for ever and ever,” this passage is thought to show that the torment of those who take the mark of the beast will last for eternity. However, this is a very imprecise and inaccurate translation, because in the eschatology of the New Testament the “ages of the ages” describe the oncoming ages during which Christ and the saints will be reigning (2 Tim. 4:18; Heb. 1:8; 13:21; 1 Pet. 4:11; Rev. 1:6; 5:13; 11:15; 22:5). These oncoming ages will have an end (1 Cor. 15:24-28; Heb. 9:26), so to say that because something is described as “for (the) ages of (the) ages,” it must not have an end, is simply incorrect.

    Furthermore, it is said that this punishment is “the wine of the wrath of God.” But what is this wine? Just a few verses later, it is said to be nothing other than the seven bowls of wrath which will be poured out upon those who take the mark of the beast’s name:

And the messenger cast his sickle into the earth, and harvested the grapevine of the earth, and cast [the grapes] into the great winepress of the wrath of God. And the winepress was trodden outside the city, and blood came out of the winepress, up to the bridles of the horses, from one thousand six hundred stadia. And I saw another sign in the heaven, great and marvelous, seven messengers having seven plagues - the last, because in them the wrath of God was completed. (Rev. 14:19-15:1)

These bowls consist of boils and ulcers, water poisoning, burning, pain in darkness, the battle of Armageddon, and the destruction of Babylon (Rev. 16), and they will be poured out upon those who take the mark of the beast’s name. However, these great and terrible plagues only last until the end of the tribulation, no more than three and a half years — certainly not “for ever and ever.”

    This interpretation may be contested on the grounds that the torment is said to last for ages of ages. However, this is inaccurate. The torment itself is not said to last for ages of ages, but the smoke of the torment. The exact same thing is said of Babylon in Rev. 19:3, and yet the punishment of Babylon lasted no longer than “a day” (Rev. 18:8) or even “an hour” (Rev. 18:10, 17, 19). Therefore, the context shows that Rev. 14:9-11 is not speaking of any ‘eternal punishment’ for those who take the mark of the beast’s name, but the seven bowls of the wine of God’s wrath which will be poured out upon those who take this mark, the smoke of which shall go up for ages of ages.

    10. The Lake of Fire

And the Adversary, the [one] deceiving them, was cast to the Lake of the Fire and of sulfur, where also the beast and the false prophet [are], and they will be tormented day and night for the ages of the ages... Then the death and the Hades were cast to the Lake of the Fire. This, the Lake of the Fire, is the second death. And if someone was not found having been written in the Scroll of the Life, he was cast to the Lake of the Fire. (Rev. 20:10, 14-15)

    This passage characterizes the torment of the Adversary, beast, and false prophet in the Lake of the Fire as “for the ages of the ages” (εις τους αιωνας των αιωνων), which is translated in most Bible versions as “for ever and ever.” Like with Rev. 14:9-11, this argument fails because the “ages of the ages” does not describe an eternal time period, but instead the ages during which Christ and the saints reign together (2 Tim. 4:18; Heb. 13:21; Rev. 1:6; 5:13; 11:15; 22:5), which will have an end (1 Cor. 15:24-28). Certainly this does not prove that the torment of these three will have an end, any more than it proves that God’s glory will have an end (cf. Gal. 1:5, Php. 4:20), but neither does it prove that their torment will not have an end.

    Conclusion

In this word study, we saw that olam, αιων, and αιωνιος refer to indefinite time periods throughout the Hebrew Bible and Septuagint, but are rarely - if ever - used to describe everlastingness (even when applied to God Himself). In line with this, the New Testament also uses αιων and αιωνιος to describe indefinite time periods, but with the more developed eschatology of the NT also came a specialized usage of these words to refer to defined eschatological periods known as “ages” or “eons.”

    Although αιων and αιωνιος are often taken to mean “everlasting,” “eternal,” or “for ever,” the scriptural evidence does not support such a translation. Instead, the expressions εις τον αιωνα (lit. “for the age”), εις τους αιωνας (lit. “for the ages”), and εις τους αιωνας των αιωνων (lit. “for the ages of the ages”) each refer to the future ages during which Christ and the saints will be reigning, which will eventually end once Christ returns the kingdom of God to the Father. Likewise, the adjective αιωνιος describes things which are “age-during” (pertaining to/of the ages).

    There are Greek words which describe things that are truly without end, such as αιδιος (“eternal”), παντοτε (“at all times”), απεραντος (“interminable”), and ατελευτος (“endless”). However, none of these words are ever used to describe the punishment of the wicked; only derivatives and cognates of the word αιων (“age,” referring to a defined eschatological period) are used. Furthermore, the context of most of the passages used to support everlasting punishment shows that the meaning cannot be “everlasting.” Unfortunately, virtually all translations of scripture obscure this fact by using inaccurate translations of αιων and αιωνιος.

Just how long is ‘eternal’? A study on the meanings of Αιων and Αιωνιος (part 4 of 5)

Part 3: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/07/just-how-long-is-eternal-study-on.html

     As we saw earlier in this study, the Greek words αιων and αιωνιος are used in the Old Testament (LXX) to describe periods of indeterminate — but never infinite — length. This usage is retained in the New Testament, although with a more specialized usage of these words, to describe eschatological periods with a determined beginning and end, becomes dominant in the NT. It is extremely inconsistent to assume, as non-universalists do, that αιωνιος must refer to a period without end when applied to the punishment of unbelievers, but elsewhere refers to periods as short as seventy years (Jer. 25:9) or even three days (Jon. 2:6) and is rarely, if ever, used to describe periods of infinite duration!

    In this final part of our study on αιων and αιωνιος, we will substantiate the claim that these words indicate a non-infinite duration when applied to the punishment of unbelievers, by taking a look at specific phrases and passages in the New Testament which are thought to prove the everlasting nature of punishment.

    The translational inaccuracies of “for ever” and “for ever and ever”

One of the terms thought to indicate eternity, or everlasting duration, in scripture is “εις τον αιωνα” — literally, “for the age.” Most Bible versions translate this term as “for ever,” this making it appear to describe an infinite duration of time. However, this is very inaccurate in light of what we have already seen; in the LXX, εις τον αιωνα is used to translate olam in dozens of places where neither of these terms can refer to an everlasting period (such as the reign of a king, or the servitude of bondmen). Furthermore, Exodus 15:18 (LXX) states that God shall reign “τον αιωνα και επ’ αιωνα και ετι,” translated literally as “for age upon age and further”! If there is a “further” beyond εις τον αιωνα, it should be evident that this term cannot, in itself, be describing an everlasting period.

    This term is used the same way, to describe an indefinitely long duration, in extrabiblical and deuterocanonical literature as well. For example, 1 Maccabees 14:41 states that the Jewish people resolved that Simon should be their leader and high priest “εις τον αιωνα”; that is, “until another trustworthy prophet should arise.” Clearly, this cannot refer to an everlasting timespan, because the period being described as εις τον αιωνα is immediately said to have an end (cf. Isa. 32:14-15).

    Even in the New Testament, there are many other instances where the term εις τον αιωνα is used to describe a period that has an end. The epistle to the Hebrews repeatedly states that Jesus has become a heavenly high priest εις τον αιωνα (5:6; 6:20; 7:17, 21, 24, 28), which is translated in most Bible versions as “for ever.” However, the work of a high priest is to deal with sin (Heb. 2:14; 5:1), and so Jesus will only remain a high priest as long as there is still sin. Does this mean that sin will remain forever, and God will never truly defeat sin and death? No, because Jesus will only remain a high priest “for the age” — that is, until the end of the Messianic Age, after which sin and death are defeated (1 Cor. 15:24-28).

    Furthermore, to translate εις τον αιωνα as “for ever” is entirely inconsistent with how similar terms are used elsewhere in the New Testament. The plural version of this term, εις τους αιωνας (lit. “for the ages”) appears nine times in the NT: Matt. 6:13; Lk. 1:33; Rom. 1:25; 9:5; 11:36; 16:27; 2 Cor. 11:31; Heb. 13:8; and Jude 25. If εις τον αιωνα means “for ever,” then εις τους αιωνας must mean “for evers,” a clearly meaningless expression (there cannot be more than one consecutive everlasting period). But if, instead, the NT usage of εις τον αιωνα refers to a period spanning a single eschatological age, then εις τους αιωνας refers to a period spanning multiple ages. Yet even these ages shall have an end eventually, for Jesus will reign “for the ages [εις τους αιωνας]” (Lk. 1:33), and both His reign and the ages which it spans are said to eventually end (1 Cor. 15:24-28; Heb. 9:26).

    Another term thought to describe an everlasting duration is εις τους αιωνας των αιωνων (lit. “for the ages of the ages”), which is typically translated as “for ever and ever.” If this translation is taken literally, we again run into the same problem that we saw with εις τους αιωνας, which is that there cannot be more than one consecutive everlasting period. The word “and” is not even present in the original Greek, which shows the imprecision of the translation “for ever and ever”; if translated consistently, it should be “for evers of evers,” which is another meaningless expression.

    Instead, we should look to other instances in the Bible where the construct “thing(s) of thing(s)” is used. For example, we read about the “holy of holies” (Exod. 26:33; Heb. 9:3), the “holies of holies” (Heb. 9:25 some mss.), the “song of songs” (Song 1:1), the “King of kings” and the “Lord of lords” (1 Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16). In each of these cases, “thing(s) of thing(s)” acts as an intensifier, not referring to an infinite number of ‘things’ (as “the ages of the ages” is usually interpreted) but instead to the most preeminent of all ‘things’. Thus, the phrase “the ages of the ages” refers to the most preeminent of all ages, the two future ages during which Jesus will be reigning over the kingdom of God, and believers together with Him.

    This interpretation of “the ages of the ages” is supported by its usage throughout the NT. This term is used interchangeably to describe things which are elsewhere said to exist for “the [coming] ages,” like the reign of Christ over the kingdom of God (2 Tim. 4:18; Heb. 1:8; 13:21; 1 Pet. 4:11; Rev. 1:6; 5:13; 11:15 cf. Lk. 1:33) and the reign of the saints and believers with Him (Rev. 22:5 cf. Eph. 2:6-7). And according to Paul’s prophecy in 1 Corinthians 15:24-28, the reign of Christ and believers over the kingdom of God will eventually end, when all rule, power, and authority is abolished and Christ voluntarily subjects Himself to the Father. Therefore, the phrase “for the ages of the ages” seems to be another designation for the oncoming ages, which will eventually have an end; the translation “for ever and ever” is very imprecise and inaccurate.

    The Αιωνιος God

One argument for the position that the terms αιωνιος (“pertaining to/of the ages”), εις τους αιωνας (“for the ages”), and εις τους αιωνας των αιωνων (“for the ages of the ages”) do refer to everlasting periods is the fact that these expressions are applied to God Himself throughout the New Testament. God Himself is described as αιωνιος (Rom. 16:26; 1 Tim. 1:17), as is His spirit (Heb. 9:14) and His honor and might (1 Tim. 6:16). Likewise, the doxologies throughout the NT often describe God’s glory and blessing as “for the ages” (Matt. 6:13; Rom. 1:25; 9:5; 11:36; 16:27; 2 Cor. 11:31) or “for the ages of the ages” (Gal. 1:5; Php. 4:20; 1 Tim. 1:17; 1 Pet. 5:11).

    Do these passages prove that these terms must always describe an everlasting or eternal period? No. At the most, they prove that these terms describe an everlasting or eternal period when applied to God, but this does not contradict the many instances in which these terms do not describe an everlasting period, as discussed earlier in this study. However, I believe that it can be shown — as with olam — that these terms, even when applied to God, are not referencing His eternal nature but instead His nature as it pertains to the ages. See the following texts:

The Lord reigns for age upon age and further [τον αιωνα και επ’ αιωνα και ετι]. (Exod. 15:18 LXX)

I adjure you by the great God, the αιωνιον and more than αιωνιον, and Almighty, and the [One] exalted above the exalted gods. [1]

Very similar to what we saw with the characterization of God as olam in the Hebrew Bible, these two texts show that ancient Jewish and Christian writers did not consider the terms εις τον αιωνα and αιωνιος to fully encompass the period of God’s existence (and so did not consider these terms as referring to periods without beginning and/or end). Thus, although God is αιωνιος — He created the ages and works through them — He is by no means confined to the ages; He is both αιωνιος and more than αιωνιος.

    Interestingly, in the one instance in the NT where God is described as αιωνιος, the focus is on His works in the past and future ages:

Now to Him who is able to establish you, according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to a revelation of a mystery, which has been kept silent in times of ages, but now manifested, and through the prophetic scriptures, according to a command of the Αιωνιου God, for obedience of faith which was made known to all the Gentiles — to the only wise God, through Jesus Christ, is the glory for the ages. Amen. (Rom. 16:25-27)

Paul writes that God has kept hidden the mystery of the gospel in the times of ages (χρονοις αιωνιοις, referring to the past age[s] and current age), and that He will receive the glory throughout the future ages. It is in the middle of this doxology that Paul establishes God as “the Αιωνιος God,” a title which refers to God’s work throughout all past and future ages. And yet, just because God is αιωνιος does not mean that He is confined to the ages, any more than His being “the Lord of all the earth” (Josh 3:11, 13) contradicts the fact that He is not contained by even the highest heavens (2 Chron. 2:6). This is because He is not only αιωνιος, but even more than αιωνιος (as the inscription quoted above establishes).

Part 5: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/07/just-how-long-is-eternal-study-on_01453834532.html

______________________________

[1] Taken from a third-century inscription found at Adrematum in ancient Byzacium. See Deissmann, Adolf. Bible Studies: Contributions Chiefly from Papyri and Inscriptions to the History of the Language, the Literature, and the Religion of Hellenistic Judaism and Primitive Christianity, p. 275. T & T Clark, 1903.

Just how long is ‘eternal’? A study on the meaning of Αιων and Αιωνιος (part 3 of 5)

Part 2: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/06/just-how-long-is-eternal-study-on_01564417483.html

     In the last two posts of this series, it was shown that the word olam in the Hebrew Bible (and its equivalents αιων and αιωνιος in the LXX) never refers to a period of time that is without end, but instead to a period of indefinite length. Theoretically, then, we would expect the words αιων and αιωνιος in the New Testament to reflect this usage. As we will see, although the words olam, αιων, and αιωνιος were used in the OT to refer to indefinite periods of time, with the more developed eschatology of the NT came a specialized usage of αιων and αιωνιος to refer to specific, eschatological periods.

    By these definitions, the word αιων refers to an “age,” a specific period with a set beginning and end, whereas the word αιωνιος, being the adjective form of αιων, means “pertaining to/of the ages” (the YLT translates this word as “age-during”). Although there are some instances in the NT where αιων or αιωνιος appear to describe a time period of indefinite length, as olam was used in the NT, it is more commonly used in its eschatological sense. Now, let’s examine the usage of αιων and αιωνιος throughout the NT.

    Αιων and Αιωνιος in the Synoptic Gospels and Acts

In the synoptic gospel accounts of the New Testament — Matthew, Mark, and Luke — a dichotomy is presented between the current age and the Messianic age to come, separated by the second coming of Christ, although there is also the acknowledgement of further ages beyond that. We first see this dichotomy in Matthew 12:32, describing the blasphemy of the holy spirit:

And if anyone says a word against the Son of Man, it will be pardoned to him; but whoever says a word against the holy spirit, it will not be pardoned to him, neither in this age nor in the coming [one].

    This age is said to be one full of worry, deceit, coveting (Matt. 13:22; Mk. 4:19), and shrewdness (Lk. 16:8), in which people marry one another (Lk. 20:34). In contrast, the coming age is one of peace, characterized by the possession of αιωνιος life (Mk. 10:30; Lk. 18:30), and those who achieve entrance into that age will no longer marry nor be able to die (Lk. 20:35-36). The end of this age and transition to the next will be accomplished at the second coming of Christ (Matt. 24:3), when all of the evildoers are gathered out of the kingdom (Matt. 13:39-42, 49-50) and the kingdom itself is returned to Israel (Acts 1:6-7).

    The existence of at least one further age following the coming Messianic age is tacitly acknowledged by Luke 1:33, which states that Jesus will reign over the house of Jacob “for the ages” (εις τους αιωνας). Based on 1 Cor. 15:24-28 which states that Jesus’ reign will eventually end, the period referred to as “the ages” cannot be everlasting in nature. (As we shall see, this conclusion is supported elsewhere in the NT, esp. Eph. 2:6-7.)

    In the Luke-Acts corpus, there are also several instances of αιων being used in a similar way to Hebrew olam, as referring to an indefinitely long period of time. We are told in Lk. 1:70 and Acts 3:21, 15:18 that certain events concerning the fathers and prophets occurred “from an age” (απ’ αιωνος), similar to the use of me’olam in the OT (e.g., Josh. 24:2). It is also said in Lk. 1:55 that Jesus had been promised to Abraham and his descendants “for the age” (εις τον αιωνα), referring to the period of Messianic prophecy from Abraham up until Jesus’ own time, which was neither without beginning nor without end.

    The usage of αιωνιος within the synoptic gospel accounts largely agrees with the translation proposed above, “pertaining to/of the ages.” Αιωνιος life, usually translated as “eternal life” or “everlasting life,” is defined by Jesus as the privilege of living and reigning with Him in the Messianic Age (Matt. 19:28-29 cf. Mk. 10:30; Lk. 19:30). According to John, we already “have” the life of the Age in the present tense if we believe (John 3:36; 5:24; 6:47, 54; 1 John 5:11, 13). It is defined as “knowing God and Christ” (John 17:3). Therefore, in the gospel accounts (i.e., Matt. 19:16; 25:46; Mk. 10:17, 30; Lk. 10:25; 18:18, 30; Acts 13:46, 48), αιωνιος life refers to “life pertaining to/of the Messianic Age.”

    Luke 16:9 seems to reflect the usage of αιωνιος in the LXX as referring to an indefinite period of time. Jesus tells His followers to make friends using “the wealth of unrighteousness,” so that when their wealth fails, their newfound friends will receive them into “αιωνιους dwellings.” Are these dwellings everlasting? Clearly not! These are not dwellings in the age to come, but dwellings in the current age; Jesus would not have told his followers to buy dwellings in the age to come with “wealth of unrighteousness.” And even if this were referring to dwellings in the age to come, they would eventually be destroyed along with the earth (2 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 21:1). So then, in this passage, αιωνιος reflects the OT usage of olam as referring to an indefinite period; the “αιωνιους dwellings” are dwellings that last as long as the disciples will need them.

    Αιων and Αιωνιος in the gospel of John

The multi-age eschatological scheme which is present in the synoptic gospels is not as blatant throughout John’s gospel account, however, it seems to be implicitly assumed. The noun αιων is only ever used throughout this gospel in the phrase εις τον αιωνα (“for the age”), and αιωνιος is only ever used to describe “αιωνιος life” (4:14, 36; 5:24, 39; 6:27, 40, 47, 54, 68; 10:28; 12:25, 50; 17:2; 17:3).

    The gospel of John provides the clearest evidence for the meaning of “αιωνιος life.” First, αιωνιος life is considered equivalent to entering the kingdom of God (3:3, 5 cf. 3:15-16, 36), or the Messianic kingdom. It is later paralleled with “not thirsting for the Age [εις τον αιωνα]” (Jn. 4:14), almost certainly referring to the Messianic Age. According to John, we already “have” the life of the Age in the present tense if we believe (John 3:36; 5:24; 6:47, 54; 1 John 5:11, 13). It is defined as “knowing God and Christ” (John 17:3). This is more than a mere intellectual knowledge, and involves God and his Son actually coming to dwell in communion with us (John 14:23; 1 John 1:3; 2:24; 3:23-24; 4:12-13).

    Elsewhere, αιωνιος life is also contrasted with dying “for the Age [εις τον αιωνα].” For example, see Jn. 8:34-35, 51; 10:28; and 11:26. Those who have αιωνιος life shall not perish for the Messianic Age, for αιωνιος life is the “life pertaining to/of the Age.” This is most likely not referring to literal death, as the “death” of the Johannine corpus is a state that believers will not experience (John 3:16; 8:51; 10:28; 11:26). It is a state we already existed in, from which we passed into life when we first believed (John 5:24; 1 John 3:14). Thus, both the “αιωνιος life” and death εις τον αιωνα in John’s gospel are current states experienced by believers and unbelievers, respectively.

    In Jn. 14:16, Jesus tells His disciples that the “other paraclete” will abide with them “for the age [εις τον αιωνα].” Because the paraclete, the spirit of Christ (Rom. 8:9-11), is what connects us to both Jesus and the Father, this is equivalent to Jesus’ statement that He will be with us “until the completion of the age” (Matt. 28:20). Thus, in this case, the phrase “εις τον αιωνα” refers to the period up to the end of the age and second coming of Christ.

    Finally, there is also one instance where the noun αιων is used in the same way as in the LXX. This is in Jn. 9:32, where it is said that “from the age [εκ του αιωνος] it has not been heard that anyone opened the eyes of one who was born blind.” However, references to the healing of the blind can be found in the Old Testament (Ps. 146:8; Isa. 29:18; 35:5; 42:7), so εκ του αιωνος must in this instance simply mean “long ago,” in line with the usage of me’olam in the Hebrew Bible (and απο του αιωνος in the LXX).

    Αιων and Αιωνιος in the epistles of Paul

Unlike the eschatology of the synoptic gospels, which distinguishes between the current age and the Messianic age to come, and implicitly acknowledges at least one further age beyond that, Paul explicitly acknowledges more than one age to come and, in most cases, lumps the Messianic Age in with the age(s) following it. That Paul believed in the same distinction between the current age and the one to come is shown by Eph. 1:20-21:

Christ... above every rule and authority and power and lordship, and every name [which] is named, not only in this age, but also in the coming [one].

This age is called “the wicked age” (Gal. 1:4), and is under the power of the Adversary and his demonic forces (2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 2:2; 6:12 cf. 1 Cor. 2:8). The wisdom of this age is said to be nothing but folly, and God’s wisdom to be far greater (1 Cor. 1:20; 2:6-7; 3:18). We are exhorted not to conform to this age, but instead to live humbly and piously within it (Rom. 12:2; 1 Tim. 6:17; Titus 2:12), and those who “love the present age” are said to have forsaken Paul (2 Tim. 4:10).

    In contrast, the coming ages are when we are be shown the riches of God’s glory and reign with Christ (Eph. 2:6-7). These ages are also referred to by Paul as “the ages of the ages,” during which Christ will be glorified in His kingdom, and we in Him (2 Tim. 4:18; cf. Eph. 3:21). One purpose of these ages is for the body of Christ to bring the message of salvation to the rulers and authorities in the heavenlies (Eph. 3:10-11 cf. 6:12). Paul also acknowledged that these ages will have an end, for eventually Christ shall return the kingdom to the Father (1 Cor. 15:24-28). [1]

    Interestingly, Paul also seems to imply the existence of at least one age prior to the current one, as he says that the mystery of the gospel was hidden “from the ages [απο των αιωνων]” (Eph. 3:9, Col. 1:26 cf. 1 Cor. 2:7). This means Paul believed that this age was preceded by at least one age, unless αιων is being used in this instance like me’olam in the OT (which seems unlikely because olam was never translated with plural αιων in the LXX).

    The usage of αιωνιος in Paul’s epistles supports our proposed translation of this word, “pertaining to/of the ages.” In three instances, he states that the mystery of the gospel was hidden or promised “before times of the ages [προ χρονων αιωνιων]” (2 Tim. 1:9; Titus 1:2 cf. Rom. 16:25). This cannot refer to a period without beginning, nor without end, for there was a time before this period, and the period ended when the mystery of the gospel was revealed — instead, the meaning must be the same as when Paul states that the gospel was hidden “from the ages” (see above).

    Virtually all of the other instances of αιωνιος in Paul’s epistles refer to αιωνιος life (Rom. 2:7; 5:21; 6:22-23; Gal. 6:8; 2 Thess. 2:16; 1 Tim. 1:16; 6:12, 19; 2 Tim. 2:10; Titus 1:2; 3:7), which as noted above refers solely to the privilege of living and reigning with Christ during the oncoming ages (cf. Eph. 2:6-7). This αιωνιος life is not without beginning, nor without end, as it begins at the “first resurrection” (Jn. 6:40, 54; Rev. 20:4) and will end when Christ gives up the kingdom to the Father (1 Cor. 15:24-28). [2] Therefore, this usage of αιωνιος also means “pertaining to/of the ages” and not “everlasting” or “eternal.”

    However, there are certain instances in which non-universalists argue that αιωνιος must mean “everlasting.” The first of these is Romans 2:7, in which it is said that those who seek for glory, honor, and immortality will receive αιωνιος life — it is argued that, because αιωνιος life is paralleled with “immortality,” this must refer to the everlasting aspect of that life. However, although immortality is certainly an aspect of αιωνιος life, since those who achieve the age to come and the first resurrection will be made immortal (Lk. 20:35-36; 1 Cor. 15:51-55), this does not mean that αιωνιος life is immortality, any more than αιωνιος life is glory or honor (which are also paralleled in Rom. 2:7).

    The other instance in which it is argued that αιωνιος must mean “everlasting” is 2 Cor. 4:18, in which the adjective αιωνιος is contrasted with the adjective προσκαιρος. It is supposed that προσκαιρος should be translated as “temporal,” and therefore its antonym αιωνιος must mean “eternal.” However, the adjective προσκαιρος does not mean “temporal,” but literally “for a season,” and is elsewhere used to describe those things which are fleeting and temporary (Matt. 13:21; Mk. 4:17; Heb. 11:25). Thus, the antonym, αιωνιος, would more accurately mean “long-lasting” (in contrast to “fleeting”), and not necessarily “eternal.”

    Finally, one instance of αιωνιος in Paul’s epistle to Philemon is in line with the use of olam in the Hebrew Bible as referring to an indefinitely long duration. Here, Paul writes:

For perhaps because of this, [Onesimus] was separated [from you] for an hour, so that you may have him αιωνιον. (Phil. 15)

Philemon could not have kept Onesimus as a servant for eternity, but only for as long as Onesimus would live. Thus, in this instance, αιωνιος refers to a time period even shorter than a single human lifespan. (See also Exod. 21:6; Lev. 25:46; and Deut. 15:17 in which it is said that certain people may become servants olam, also clearly referring to less than a human lifespan.)

    Αιων and Αιωνιος in the rest of the New Testament

The eschatology of the rest of the New Testament is entirely in line with what we have already seen in the epistles of Paul. The distinction between the current age and the Messianic Age is maintained (Heb. 6:5), and it is said that believers will be living εις τον αιωνα, “for the [Messianic] Age” (1 Jn. 2:17; 2 Jn. 1:2). There are said to be multiple ages to come (Heb. 13:8; Jude 25), called “the ages of the ages” during which both Christ Jesus and the saints will be reigning (Heb. 1:8; 1 Pet. 4:11; 5:11; Rev. 1:6; 5:13; 11:15; 22:5). These ages are also said to have an end (Heb. 9:26), in line with 1 Cor. 15:24-28.

    The most developed eschatology can be found in the book of Revelation, which was written by John on the isle of Patmos (although which John wrote this book is debated). This book describes the Messianic Age in detail, during which believers reign together with Christ (Rev. 20:4-6; 22:3-5). These are the “oncoming ages” and “ages of the ages” spoken of throughout the New Testament, during which Christ and the saints will reign, and which will eventually come to an end at the time prophesied in 1 Cor. 15:24-28 (and Heb. 9:26).

    The use of αιωνιος in the rest of the New Testament is also in accord with what we have already seen. Most instances of αιωνιος are found in the term “αιωνιος life” (1 Jn. 1:2; 2:25; 3:15; 5:11, 13, 20; Jude 21), which, as described already, simply refers to the privilege of living and reigning with Christ in the ages to come, and will eventually have an end (per 1 Cor. 15:24-28). By reason of the characterization of “life” as αιωνιος, so also salvation, redemption, the gospel, and our future glory are described as αιωνιος (Heb. 5:9; 9:12; 1 Pet. 5:10; Rev. 14:6). The kingdom of Christ is also called αιωνιος (2 Pet. 1:11), even though this kingdom will have a beginning (Dan. 7:14; Rev. 11:15; 12:10) and Christ’s reign over it will eventually end (1 Cor. 15:24-28).

    Summary: the use of Αιων and Αιωνιος in the New Testament

Having examined the usage of the Greek words αιων and αιωνιος in the New Testament, we can make the conclusion that the authors of the NT did not use these words to describe infinite time periods without end, but instead used them in an eschatological sense to describe the current “age” and future “ages” (during which Christ will be reigning over the kingdom and believers with Him), as well as things pertaining to these ages. This is in line with the usage of αιων and αιωνιος in the LXX to describe durations of indeterminate - but not infinite - length, as we saw in the previous parts of this study.

    The adjective αιωνιος is frequently applied to things and time periods which are neither without beginning, nor without end, as seen in (for example) Rom. 16:25; 2 Tim. 1:9; Titus 1:2; and 2 Pet. 1:11. Even the term “αιωνιος life,” which is frequently translated as “eternal life” or “everlasting life,” does not mean life without end, but refers to the privilege of living and reigning with Jesus in the ages to come. In the next post, we will look at phrases and passages that are usually thought to teach that the punishment of unbelievers will be without end, and make a determination as to whether the scriptural evidence supports this view, or if it is more in line with universalism.

Part 4: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/07/just-how-long-is-eternal-study-on_01876064027.html

______________________________

[1] Many object to the view that Christ will actually stop reigning and be subjected to God at the consummation. However, Paul could not be clearer on this point. He states that Christ will, at this time, “hand over the kingdom to the God and Father,” that “He will reign until” such a time, and that “the Son Himself will be subjected to” God.

This idea, that the Messiah must stop reigning once all enemies have been subjected to God, comes from Psalm 110:1-2, one of the most quoted Messianic prophecies in the New Testament: “Yahweh says to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet. Yahweh shall send the staff of your strength from Zion. Rule in the midst of your enemies!’” The very reason that Jesus now sits at the right hand of God is to subject all to Him; to say that Jesus will never stop reigning is to say that He will ultimately fail in the purpose for which He was sent. And of course, Jesus can only “rule in the midst of [His] enemies” as long as there are enemies.

[2] Which is not to say that we will die at the end of the ages. Rather, it will simply cease to be “αιωνιος life,” which refers to the privilege of living and reigning with Christ during the ages (and thus will end when Christ’s reign ends).