• Hi Guest!

    Please share Talk Jesus community on every platform you have to give conservatives an outlet and safe community to be apart of.

    Support This Community

    Thank You

  • Welcome to Talk Jesus

    A true bible based, Jesus centered online community. Join over 12,500 members today

    Register Log In

Anihilationism

Loyal
Aion and aionios are the same word. They mean the same thing. Aion is the noun and aionios is its adjective form. Aionios is just an inflection of aion. English also uses inflections. For instance, happy is the noun happily is the adjective. Both have the same meaning, they are just used differently in a sentence.

Sorry, but I'll the word of the concordance over yours.

αἰώνιος
aiōnios
ahee-o'-nee-os
From G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well): - eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).
Total KJV occurrences: 71

aiōn
ahee-ohn'
From the same as G104; properly an age; by extension perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specifically (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future): - age, course, eternal, (for) ever (-more), [n-]ever, (beginning of the, while the) world (began, without end). Compare G5550.
Total KJV occurrences: 128

If you don't like Strong's, I also have a Thayers,

αἰών
aiōn
Thayer Definition:
1) for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity
2) the worlds, universe
3) period of time, age
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from the same as G104

αἰώνιος
aiōnios
Thayer Definition:
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2) without beginning
3) without end, never to cease, everlasting
Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G165

I also have a NASEC lexicon

αἰώνιος
aiōnios; from G165; agelong, eternal: — eternal (66), eternity (1), forever (1).

I also have Greek to English Lexicons by Frederic Danker. Unfortunately I don't have it in electronic form, so I can't copy and paste here.

 
Active
Sorry, but I'll the word of the concordance over yours.

αἰώνιος
aiōnios
ahee-o'-nee-os
From G165; perpetual (also used of past time, or past and future as well): - eternal, for ever, everlasting, world (began).
Total KJV occurrences: 71

aiōn
ahee-ohn'
From the same as G104; properly an age; by extension perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specifically (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future): - age, course, eternal, (for) ever (-more), [n-]ever, (beginning of the, while the) world (began, without end). Compare G5550.
Total KJV occurrences: 128

If you don't like Strong's, I also have a Thayers,

αἰών
aiōn
Thayer Definition:
1) for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity
2) the worlds, universe
3) period of time, age
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from the same as G104

αἰώνιος
aiōnios
Thayer Definition:
1) without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be
2) without beginning
3) without end, never to cease, everlasting
Part of Speech: adjective
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G165

I also have a NASEC lexicon

αἰώνιος
aiōnios; from G165; agelong, eternal: — eternal (66), eternity (1), forever (1).

I also have Greek to English Lexicons by Frederic Danker. Unfortunately I don't have it in electronic form, so I can't copy and paste here.
Just because something is in a dictionary doesn't mean it's correct. How many books contain teaching on evolution? There are probably millions. Does that make them correct? Look at all of the Christian denominations are they all correct? If not then it means Christians, like everyone else, make mistakes. Most Christians believe they go to Heaven when they die too, yet there's not a single passage of Scripture to support that. Many if not most of those same authors, of the dictionaries, believe they go to Heaven when they die. If they're wrong about that they can surely be wrong about the meaning of a word.
 
Loyal
Most Christians believe they go to Heaven when they die too, yet there's not a single passage of Scripture to support that. Many if not most of those same authors, of the dictionaries, believe they go to Heaven when they die. If they're wrong about that they can surely be wrong about the meaning of a word.

I agree with you about heaven, however that is not the case for hell and the Lake of Fire.
Greek in still spoken today, the words aion and aionios are still in common use today. Over 70 Greek scholars have helped put some of these (such as NASEC) together.

Go to google... type in "Greek to English translate"
Then type in αιωνιος or aionios.

This is a secular translation, not even from a Bible scholar.
 
Active
I agree with you about heaven, however that is not the case for hell and the Lake of Fire.
Greek in still spoken today, the words aion and aionios are still in common use today. Over 70 Greek scholars have helped put some of these (such as NASEC) together.

Go to google... type in "Greek to English translate"
Then type in αιωνιος or aionios.

This is a secular translation, not even from a Bible scholar.
My point was if they can be so universally wrong on one subject they can be on another.

How a word is used today has no bearing on how it was used 2000 years ago. Languages change over time. If you saw a copy of the first English translation of the Bible you'd see that it's bearly readable.
 
Loyal
How a word is used today has no bearing on how it was used 2000 years ago. Languages change over time. If you saw a copy of the first English translation of the Bible you'd see that it's bearly readable.

Of course, you're right and all these scholars and websites are wrong. You realize you're telling me all these resources are wrong, don't believe them because they are wrong.

... "but I'm right". What makes you more right than all these other resources?

I have a 320 year old Bible personally. I also have personally seen one of the Tynedale Bibles from the late 1490's. It was in a glass case, and I couldn't touch it, but I had no trouble reading it.
Yes words were spelled differently, there were thee's and thou's, but it was certainly understandable.
 
Loyal
I won't put a scripture reference on the verse below. It's from a Tynedale Bible. I wonder if anyone could guess what it says, or what scripture reference it is?

For God so loveth the worlde yt he hath geven his only sonne that none that beleve in him shuld perisshe: but shuld have everlastinge lyfe.

This was written over 600 years ago.
 
Loyal
I won't put a scripture reference on the verse below. It's from a Tynedale Bible. I wonder if anyone could guess what it says, or what scripture reference it is?

For God so loveth the worlde yt he hath geven his only sonne that none that beleve in him shuld perisshe: but shuld have everlastinge lyfe.

This was written over 600 years ago.
In between the mind God created to understand things, and the help of the Holy Spirit, its certainly not difficult to read and understand it.
 
Active
I won't put a scripture reference on the verse below. It's from a Tynedale Bible. I wonder if anyone could guess what it says, or what scripture reference it is?

For God so loveth the worlde yt he hath geven his only sonne that none that beleve in him shuld perisshe: but shuld have everlastinge lyfe.

This was written over 600 years ago.
Here's a verse from the book of John from the first English translation, the Wycliff Bible of 1382.

And eftsoone another scripture seith, Thei schulen se in whom thei piyten thorow.

I purposely choose a verse that isn't instantly recognizable. When our brains already know a verse we can read it even if it's different than we see it. Can you understand the verse I've posted?
 
Active
Of course, you're right and all these scholars and websites are wrong. You realize you're telling me all these resources are wrong, don't believe them because they are wrong.

... "but I'm right". What makes you more right than all these other resources?

I have a 320 year old Bible personally. I also have personally seen one of the Tynedale Bibles from the late 1490's. It was in a glass case, and I couldn't touch it, but I had no trouble reading it.
Yes words were spelled differently, there were thee's and thou's, but it was certainly understandable.

You said you agreed about Heaven. So, I could ask you the same question. If you don't believe people go to Heaven when they die and all of those other scholars and resources say they do, what makes them all wrong and you right?

I'm not asking you to believe me. I simply showed the evidence so people can make up their own minds. The Bible uses the word aion for finite periods of time over and over again. One of the laws of nature, created by God, says that two opposing things cannot both be true at the same time. Thus a word cannot mean both finite and infinite. Now one could say, well, words are just created by people and they could give them opposing meanings. However, such a word would be useless for communication.

You asked how could all of those resources be wrong. How can so many Christians believe people go to Heaven when they die? There is not a single passage of Scripture that says that. How could so many Christians believe in an immortal soul when there isn't a single passage of Scripture that says that. On the contrary the Bible states that the Father alone has immortality. How can so many Christians believe OSAS when the Bible states plainly that Salvation can be lost. There are plenty of things Christians believe that are not in the Scriptures, yet people will argue till they're blue in the face over them. How can this be?

I would submit that most don't understand the Bible. I would submit that the vast majority of Christians learn what the Bible "teaches" from other people. Others teach people what the Bible supposedly says. These people then teach others and so error gets spread from person to person. This can be seen in the Seminary. One seminary teaches that salvation can't be lost. Another teaches that it can be. These two ideas are mutually exclusive and cannot both be true. Only one of them is true. That means that the people coming out of one of those seminaries are teaching error. Multiply that over numerous doctrines and two thousand years and it's not hard to see how large groups of people could have incorrect beliefs about the Bible.
 
Loyal
You said you agreed about Heaven. So, I could ask you the same question. If you don't believe people go to Heaven when they die and all of those other scholars and resources say they do, what makes them all wrong and you right?

The Bible. I'm pretty much a fundamentalist, I take the Bible at face value.
I have 18 different translations/interpretations, whenever a "difficult" verse comes up, I usually look at it in all/most translations to see if that helps.

If that doesn't work, I go the Strongs, or maybe the Thayers, I've been using the NASEC more lately.

If all that doesn't work, I talk to a Greek friend of mine, who speak and reads Greek. He is actual a Greek professor at a Christian BIble college.
I also have a friend that reads and speaks Hebrew, one of these friends was born in Greece, and the other was born in Israel, I'll let you decide which was born where.

But I believe
Isa 40:8; The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.

1Pet 1:25; BUT THE WORD OF THE LORD ENDURES FOREVER." And this is the word which was preached to you.

If God knows the number of the hairs on our heads, and knows all the stars by name. He can certainly control whats written in the Bible.
He can equally control what is written when a language interpreted.
If it says "forever" it really means forever. This word wasn't put there as an afterthought or by accident.

Certainly there are "bad", "counterfeit" Bible out there.
Saying I trust the Holy Spirit is almost a cliche these days. Everyone says it, but not everyone agrees on what the Bible says, so there must be a disconnect somewhere.
But I have to say it, so I trust the Spirit to guide me in all truth.

I know it may not seem like it sometimes, but I really do appreciate your questions... iron sharpening iron. Some challenge me and that's good.
I try to be teachable. I try to remain open. I've heard people say things like "I've studied the Bible for 50 years"... well, so have I.
I have had my mind changed on a few things over the years. I used to be pre-trib. I used to be "destination-heaven". These are some of the things
people have convinced me through scripture that I was wrong.
 
Loyal
would submit that most don't understand the Bible. I would submit that the vast majority of Christians learn what the Bible "teaches" from other people. Others teach people what the Bible supposedly says. These people then teach others and so error gets spread from person to person. This can be seen in the Seminary.

I could not agree with this more. There are some large denominations that certainly have this issue. I see it frequently here on TalkJesus.
It's this way because I said so. Everyone in my church believes it, so it must be right. Often they don't have scripture to support it, and if they do
it's not really saying what they think it is, and it's taken out of context. In the Bible... context is everything.
We have a few "context switchers" here on TalkJesus as well.

One of my "personal pet peeves" is when people try to build a doctrine out of a single verse.
I believe if God thinks it's important for us to know, He will say it in several places in the Bible.
..and if that "one verse" disagrees with a dozen other verses, you're likely interpreting it wrong.
Yet entire large denominations do this.
 
Active
The Bible. I'm pretty much a fundamentalist, I take the Bible at face value.
I have 18 different translations/interpretations, whenever a "difficult" verse comes up, I usually look at it in all/most translations to see if that helps.

If that doesn't work, I go the Strongs, or maybe the Thayers, I've been using the NASEC more lately.

If all that doesn't work, I talk to a Greek friend of mine, who speak and reads Greek. He is actual a Greek professor at a Christian BIble college.
I also have a friend that reads and speaks Hebrew, one of these friends was born in Greece, and the other was born in Israel, I'll let you decide which was born where.

But I believe
Isa 40:8; The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.

1Pet 1:25; BUT THE WORD OF THE LORD ENDURES FOREVER." And this is the word which was preached to you.

If God knows the number of the hairs on our heads, and knows all the stars by name. He can certainly control whats written in the Bible.
He can equally control what is written when a language interpreted.
If it says "forever" it really means forever. This word wasn't put there as an afterthought or by accident.

Certainly there are "bad", "counterfeit" Bible out there.
Saying I trust the Holy Spirit is almost a cliche these days. Everyone says it, but not everyone agrees on what the Bible says, so there must be a disconnect somewhere.
But I have to say it, so I trust the Spirit to guide me in all truth.

I know it may not seem like it sometimes, but I really do appreciate your questions... iron sharpening iron. Some challenge me and that's good.
I try to be teachable. I try to remain open. I've heard people say things like "I've studied the Bible for 50 years"... well, so have I.
I have had my mind changed on a few things over the years. I used to be pre-trib. I used to be "destination-heaven". These are some of the things
people have convinced me through scripture that I was wrong.

I too take the Bible at face value. What I question is the ideas and teachings of men. I've come to find that quite a bit of what I was taught in churches can't be found in the Scriptures, or was simply wrong. Because of that I began to scrutinize the teachings more carefully. I began to actually check the Scriptures to see if those things were there. Often they weren't. I was taught opposing views on OSAS from two different churches. I realized both sides can't be right, so I decided to find out which one was correct. But then I began to wonder, what else have I been taught that is wrong. At that point I put everything I believed on the table. What I could prove from Scripture I kept, what I couldn't I rejected. However, since I had been taught opposing views I decided to go back to the very beginning and see what the first Christians believed. After all, what was first taught is the truth. I went to the source itself, the writings of the early Christians, so I could get it in their own words. I came to realize that much of what I was taught simply wasn't what the Christian faith is all about.

Iron sharpening iron is always good. I love when my beliefs are challenged, it forces me to look at them in depth to see if in fact they are correct. Some of those challenges have caused me to change positions of the years some have reaffirmed what I already believed. The thing is, for me, it has to make sense. I don't accept contradictions anymore. That doesn't mean I have to understand everything about God, but what I understand has to make sense.

I know it may not seem like it here, but I am actually teachable. It's usually over a long format. For instance, someone makes a claim and then lays out a solid argument for that claim. I'm not talking about just posting Scripture but actually going through the Bible and laying out how something is shown through the Bible. One example of this was a study of what a man is. It entailed looking at the words, soul, (nephesh and psuche) and spirit (Neshamah, ruach, and pnuema), throughout the Scriptures and seeing how they are used all through the Bible.
 
Active
I could not agree with this more. There are some large denominations that certainly have this issue. I see it frequently here on TalkJesus.
It's this way because I said so. Everyone in my church believes it, so it must be right. Often they don't have scripture to support it, and if they do
it's not really saying what they think it is, and it's taken out of context. In the Bible... context is everything.
We have a few "context switchers" here on TalkJesus as well.

One of my "personal pet peeves" is when people try to build a doctrine out of a single verse.
I believe if God thinks it's important for us to know, He will say it in several places in the Bible.
..and if that "one verse" disagrees with a dozen other verses, you're likely interpreting it wrong.
Yet entire large denominations do this.
Yep, I see that kind of stuff all the time. I've been to churches that love you when you agree with them, but when you point out something they believe that doesn't fit the Scriptures, well... On to the next church.
 
Moderator
Staff Member
@Butch5
Greetings Brother

Hi Br. Bear,

Why does there have to be something more than death? Nowhere in all of Scripture does it say the soul that sins shall suffer eternal conscious torment. Don't we think that if God intended to torment people for eternity He would tell us? All through the Bible man is told to turn away from sin. Yet, nowhere are we told that sinners will suffer for eternity. The Scriptures say that God cannot lie. God said, the soul that sins shall die. All through the Bible the consequence of sin is death.

I would submit that the Bible doesn't indicate more severe warnings than death. I believe that comes from our presuppositions.

thank you for the reply.

I hear what you are saying. However, i get stuck with looking from an unsaved point of view, in that if all that happens is the lights go out and that's that, then, so what? At least i've had a good time without all that religion bothering me! Somehow, that doesn't sit right.

I am all for disposing of any and all presuppositions and being aware that traditional thinking, or thinking of the age, or whatever one might call it, because we can spend our days going along with ideas and patterns of interpretation that simply clash with Scripture if we were to honestly admit it. Usually we either make up stuff as we go along or say that is God;s business, as a way of avoiding the conflicts we might encounter, so being able to go to Scripture with no preconceived ideas is potentially wholesome. We do however need to be aware that even then, we can be totally wrong and that as members of a body, we do have the resources of one another to study and run things past. Ultimately, we have the promise of the Helper and the faith that the One Who began a good work in us is able also to complete it. It does come back to being diligent in our seeking Him rather than simply blasé and uncaring about if it does or does not say this or that.

We can get hard headed and adamant due to our own pride and fears, too.

I appreciate your honesty and input, for, if nothing else, it allows some to dig in a bit and allow a challenge, to check out the Scripture afresh and that is always good.

I know you have had interaction with other sincere and honest members and will have a look over it all and perhaps get back again to you.

Back to your comment about death and why that ought to be enough [my crude paraphrase], i remember once getting a snippet of void. It was not at all pleasant and thoroughly NOT recommended. A snippet was as much as i think anyone would want. So, perhaps it is about a continuous and permanent state of being?
In fact, that word, permanent, is possibly fitting when regarding forever and/or eternal? What do you think?


Bless you ....><>
 
Moderator
Staff Member
Greetings,

Only one of them is true.

i know this is strictly not about the thread but i find often that both are wrong and they are arguing over something they both believe is a valid 'thought', while they totally miss what it is all really about.

Perhaps we should go there a little?
What is the Bible about?
What does it mean to believe in the Son?

Can we build on the foundation that God has laid and see if it all fits as it should?


Bless you ....><>
 
Active
May i also pick up on the thought of the notion that "if i am simply going to cease to exist when i die, what does it matter?"


It wouls seem to matter in that way. it either proves God not seen to be trre or mankind the creation ?

The father of lies would teach one does not cease . Did it matter?

Geneisis3: 4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
 
Active
@Butch5
Greetings Brother



thank you for the reply.

I hear what you are saying. However, i get stuck with looking from an unsaved point of view, in that if all that happens is the lights go out and that's that, then, so what? At least i've had a good time without all that religion bothering me! Somehow, that doesn't sit right.

I am all for disposing of any and all presuppositions and being aware that traditional thinking, or thinking of the age, or whatever one might call it, because we can spend our days going along with ideas and patterns of interpretation that simply clash with Scripture if we were to honestly admit it. Usually we either make up stuff as we go along or say that is God;s business, as a way of avoiding the conflicts we might encounter, so being able to go to Scripture with no preconceived ideas is potentially wholesome. We do however need to be aware that even then, we can be totally wrong and that as members of a body, we do have the resources of one another to study and run things past. Ultimately, we have the promise of the Helper and the faith that the One Who began a good work in us is able also to complete it. It does come back to being diligent in our seeking Him rather than simply blasé and uncaring about if it does or does not say this or that.

We can get hard headed and adamant due to our own pride and fears, too.

I appreciate your honesty and input, for, if nothing else, it allows some to dig in a bit and allow a challenge, to check out the Scripture afresh and that is always good.

I know you have had interaction with other sincere and honest members and will have a look over it all and perhaps get back again to you.

Back to your comment about death and why that ought to be enough [my crude paraphrase], i remember once getting a snippet of void. It was not at all pleasant and thoroughly NOT recommended. A snippet was as much as i think anyone would want. So, perhaps it is about a continuous and permanent state of being?
In fact, that word, permanent, is possibly fitting when regarding forever and/or eternal? What do you think?


Bless you ....><>
Hi Br. Bear.

Sorry for the delayed reply. A lot of people take the view of the unsaved person you mentioned. I don't see why that would require something more than death. We're told in Scripture that the wicked will suffer God's wrath and be destroyed. I don't understand why death wouldn't be enough. The most valuable thing any lost person has is his life.


I agree with what you've said here about being wrong and bouncing ideas off of one another. I don't, however, really think its about being hard headed or prideful, as much as it is about recognizing that our process may be wrong. I wonder how many, if asked, could give a method of hermeneutics that they use when interpreting Scripture. If we have no rules to guide us in interpretation that leaves us open to mistakes. We have rules in English so we can understand what is being said. Yet, I often see the rules of the Greek language broken in interpretations of Scripture. I wonder how one can come to a proper understanding of the text when they are breaking the rules of grammar. I think this is where a lot of the problem come from. I think we often fail to take the historical setting into context. For instance, Jesus said that He had only come to the lost Sheep of the House of Israel. Yet, I often see Christians quote Jesus' words in John saying, 'no one can come to me unless the Father draws him'. and claim that this applies universally to all people. I see instances like this over and over. However, often when you point this out, instead of engaging the, out of context use, people ignore it and continue with the claim. I don't see how we can say the Bible says xyz when we're taking passages out of context. I think if we would all be willing to consider our methods and the way we approach the Scriptures we could go a long way to getting a proper understanding of what the Bible actually teaches.

I've heard some define aion as permanent, and while I agree that the result is permanent in the destruction of the wicked, I don't think we can use that as definition. For instance, there were parts of the Mosaic Law that were said to be aion. If we say that means permanent then they would have to be still occurring today. But they're not
 
Active
Greetings,



i know this is strictly not about the thread but i find often that both are wrong and they are arguing over something they both believe is a valid 'thought', while they totally miss what it is all really about.

Perhaps we should go there a little?
What is the Bible about?
What does it mean to believe in the Son?

Can we build on the foundation that God has laid and see if it all fits as it should?


Bless you ....><>
Hi Br. Bear,

In that instance I believe it is an either/or. However, I understand what you're saying and I agree. I've seen this in the Predestination debate. One side argues that God chose who would be saved before the foundation of the world and the other says that God knows who will believe and chose them. However, both sides are wrong because it's talking about who's being saved.
 
Top